Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs and Benefits according to the WFD

Transcription

1 Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs and Benefits according to the WFD Name Address Job Title Institution Department Country Telephone Fax Administrative Unit to which answers refer (name of the country / region / province / river basin / sub-basin) Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. The AquaMoney project, funded by the EU-Commissions DG Research, aims to develop and test practical guidelines for the assessment of environmental and resource costs and benefits in the European Water Framework Directive (WFD). For further details about AquaMoney, see The function of this survey is to better understand what role decision makers see for environmental and resource costs and benefits in WFD implementation, how the decisions involving environmental and resource costs and benefits will be taken, and what guidance is needed in this process. The results of this questionnaire are essential input for the development of guidance materials, to make sure that they meet the demands of the stakeholders and decision makers who will be using them. We have taken care to keep this document straightforward and understandable; unfortunately, some use of technical terms is hard to avoid. Explanations of some key terms are therefore provided in section 6 (at the end of this document). Contact person: Benjamin Görlach goerlach@ecologic.de Tel Fax:

2 Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD Part 1: Actors and Process This section addresses the institutions and procedures for dealing with economic aspects of the Water Framework Directive in your region. 1.1 Which ministries or administrative bodies in your region are dealing with the assessment of environmental and resource costs and benefits (ERCB)? 1.2 Has work commenced on assessing environmental and resource costs and benefits? If so, please provide references to the most important published output (guidance, methodologies). If these are not yet available, briefly summarise the most important ongoing efforts. 1.3 By whom is the issue of cost recovery (Art. 9 WFD) handled in your region / country? (If different parts of the decision making process are handled at different levels, please specify which and where) Mostly by local-level staff with economic expertise: Mostly by local-level staff without economic expertise: Mostly by centralised agency of economic experts: Mostly by consultants with economic expertise: Not yet decided / other [please specify]. 1.4 By whom is the issue of disproportionate costs / exemptions (Art. 4 WFD) handled in your region / country? Mostly by local-level staff with economic expertise: Mostly by local-level staff without economic expertise: Mostly by centralised agency of economic experts: Mostly by consultants with economic expertise: Not yet decided / other [please specify]. Thank you! 2

3 Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD 1.5 OPTIONAL if is available: Which ministries or administrative bodies in your region / country are responsible for taking the decisions / for reporting decisions in which assessments of environmental and resource costs and benefits are used? If possible, please differentiate which types of decisions are taken at which level. Part 2: Use of Definitions and Guidance Documents This section addresses the guidance material and that you currently use to support the process of valuing environmental and resource costs and benefits. The that you provide will help improving the guidance material developed as part of the AquaMoney project, by identifying best practice examples among the existing guidance. 2.1 Which definitions of environmental costs and resource costs do you use? Not known / not decided yet [elaborate, if necessary] Definitions provided by the 2002 WATECO guidance (see Box below) Definitions provided by the 2004 CIS Drafting Group Eco 2 (see Box below) Others, namely: Environmental costs [Please insert your definition here. Use as much space as you need.] Resource costs [Please insert your definition here. Use as much space as you need.] Term WATECO definition DG ECO 2 definition Environmental costs Resource costs The costs of damage that water uses impose on the environment and ecosystems and those who use the environment. Resource costs are defined as the costs of foregone opportunities which other uses suffer due to the depletion of the resource beyond its The environmental damage costs of aquatic ecosystem degradation and depletion caused by a particular water use (e.g. water abstraction or the emission of pollutants). [Resource costs are]... the opportunity costs of using water as a scarce resource in a particular way.... They equal the difference between the economic value in terms of net benefits of present or future water use... and the economic value in terms of net benefits of Thank you! 3

4 Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD natural rate of recharge or recovery (e.g. linked to the over-abstraction of groundwater). the best alternative water use.... Resource costs only arise if alternative water use generates a higher economic value than present or foreseen future water use.... They arise as a result of an economically speaking inefficient allocation of water and/or pollution over time and across different water users What guidance documents (EU level, national and regional) are used to aid the valuation processes? Please rank the documents according to their usefulness, starting with 1 = most useful (Please include author, date, title and hyperlink.) OPTIONAL: For the guidance documents that you find most helpful, could you explain why they are helpful? (Criteria might include completeness, clarity, accuracy, timeliness, focus, etc.) 2.4 OPTIONAL: If it was deliberately chosen not to adopt either the WATECO or the DG Eco 2 definition, please state your reasons for doing so: Thank you! 4

5 Not needed Helpful Urgently needed Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD Part 3: Expectations for Guidance Material on Assessing ERCB This section will elicit your expectations for guidance material on assessing environmental and resource costs and benefits, and will help us to produce output that is relevant to your needs. 3.1 For each of the following aspects of the economic analyses of the WFD, please indicate the level of guidance you think is needed? (Please rate the need for guidance by ticking one box for each row. Please feel free to specify additional tasks and aspects) Tasks Comments (Use as much space as you need) Assessing the size of the population (users, households) affected by WFD-measures Conducting monetary valuation studies Commissioning monetary valuation studies Conducting benefits transfer Screening and prioritisation how to identify complex cases where detailed analysis is needed Interpreting results of valuation studies Presenting results of valuation studies Communicating results of valuation studies Defining environmental and resource costs Calculating cost recovery for environmental and resource costs (Art. 9) Defining disproportionate costs Assessing disproportionality of costs Communicating disproportionality of costs Estimating cost-recovery of water services as a measure in the programme of measures [insert another task] [insert another task] [insert another task] Thank you! 5

6 Not useful Could be helpful Highly useful Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD 3.2 Guidance documents differ in formats, purpose and target audience. Thus, for example, guidance can be comprehensive (or it can be brief); it can be detailed and specific for a particular policy decision (or it can be general); it can be rooted in solid science (or it can be hands-on and pragmatic), and it can be integrated or built-up in a modular way. Based on these, and on your own ideas, what are the three main qualities that make guidance material useful for your work? What key features would you like to see in guidance materials for valuation of environmental and resource costs and benefits? (Please rate the usefulness by ticking one box for each row ) Features Comments (Use as much space as you need) Illustrative case studies Information on data sources References to academic discourse on economic valuation Basic on economic methods and their theoretical background Practical explanation of specific valuation methods and their application Do s and Don ts Frequently asked questions Common errors and difficulties Decision trees to structure decisions and determine level of analysis needed Allowable shortcuts and methodological simplifications [insert another feature] [insert another feature] [insert another feature] [insert another feature] Thank you! 6

7 Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD 3.4 If you have any other comments, recommendations, requests or wishes regarding guidance material that do not fit into the categories above, please let us know: Part 4: Analysis Methods This section addresses the methods of analysis and the type of economic that you intend to use for different decisions related to the implementation of the WFD. 4.1 What type of economic will (probably) be used in the decision-making process for exemptions on grounds of disproportionate costs (Art. 4 WFD)? (please tick ( ) one box for each row) Type of economic used for disproportionate costs decisions (Art. 4 WFD) this type of is not used used, but not principal source of main type used Mainly qualitative (verbal-descriptive) Mainly non-monetary quantitative (e.g. kg N removed, km river restored, species found etc.) Mainly monetary, based on standard values* Mainly monetary, based on benefits transfer* Mainly monetary, based on original valuation studies Mainly monetary, involving economic modelling Other (please specify) * refer to section 6 for an explanation of the terms standard value and benefit transfer 4.2 What type of economic will (probably) be used in the decision-making process for recovery of environmental and resource costs (Art. 9 WFD)? (Please tick ( ) one box for each row) Type of economic used for recovery of environmental and resource costs (Art. 9 WFD) this type of is not used used, but not principal source of main type used Mainly qualitative (verbal-descriptive) Mainly non-monetary quantitative Mainly monetary, based on standard values* Mainly monetary, based on benefits transfer* Mainly monetary, based on original valuation studies Mainly monetary, involving economic modelling Other (please specify) * refer to section 6 for an explanation of the terms standard value and benefit transfer Thank you! 7

8 little relevance relevant essential Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD 4.3 What type of economic will (probably) be used in the decision-making process for assessing the cost-effectiveness of measures (Article 11 of WFD)? (please tick ( ) one box for each row) Type of economic used for assessing the cost-effectiveness of measures (Art. 11 WFD) this type of is not used used, but not principal source of main type used Mainly qualitative (verbal-descriptive) Mainly non-monetary quantitative Mainly monetary, based on standard values* Mainly monetary, based on benefits transfer* Mainly monetary, based on original valuation studies Mainly monetary, involving economic modelling Other (please specify) * refer to section 6 for an explanation of the terms standard value and benefit transfer Part 5: Relevance of economic valuation This section addresses your views on the relevance of economic valuation to WFD-related decision making. 5.1 In decisions related to WFD implementation, how relevant do you consider economic valuation methods at different stages of decision making? (Please tick the appropriate boxes, feel free to add comments and clarifications) Stage of decision making Comments (Use as much space as you need) Recognising the need for action Discussing the need for action with stakeholders Problem definition Identifying options Describing options Ranking options Combining different options Choosing an option Involving stakeholders in the choice of an option Communicating a decision to stakeholders Implementing an option Monitoring the implementation Evaluating implementation and feedback Thank you! 8

9 Disagree Neutral agree Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD 5.2 Which statement best fits your views regarding the use of economic valuation? (Please tick the appropriate boxes, feel free to add comments and clarifications) Statement Economic valuation methods... Comments (Use as much space as you need)... are a valuable addition to the decision making process.... help to improve the quality and accuracy of decisions.... help to make decision making and the underlying trade-offs more transparent.... could be useful in theory, but in reality they aren t due to practical constraints (e.g. lack of time, resources, data, knowledge, skills, or public acceptance)... are useful to communicate the need for action, but are too imprecise to guide actual decisions.... are necessary to meet reporting requirements, but not useful for supporting policy decisions.... [insert another statement]... [insert another statement] Thank you! 9

10 Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD Part 6: Explanation of some key terms What do we mean by... Benefit The benefit of a project, programme or policy is the positive expected aspect of an outcome, including the improvement in environmental protection or environmental quality which will flow from it, but also including other improvements for example, in cost savings, social benefits such as health, convenience, or general welfare. Benefit transfer The benefit transfer method is used to estimate monetary values for environmental goods and services by transferring and adapting existing valuation results from studies completed in another location and / or context. It is often used if an original valuation study would be too costly or too timeconsuming. For benefit transfer to deliver reliable results, the existing valuation study that is used needs to be of adequate quality, and the object of the valuation needs to be similar. Cost Costs include any capital (and the opportunity costs of this capital) and recurrent expenditure, administrative costs, monitoring and enforcement costs, and research and development costs. Economic costs include market and non-market costs, private and social ones. Cost recovery Extent to which the production or supply costs of a specific good or service are covered by the revenues. Article 9 of the WFD states that water services should recover their costs by Cost-effectiveness The principle of achieving a given target with least resource use (= cost). Article 11 WFD requires that the programmes of measures should achieve the objectives of the WFD in a cost-effective way. DG Eco 2 European Drafting Group established in 2004 in the Common Implementation Strategy (CIS) to produce a definition of environmental and resource costs Disproportionate According to Article 4 WFD, the environmental objectives of the Directive can costs be relaxed (by allowing more time or lowering environmental quality targets) if the achievement of these objectives would be disproportionately expensive. Environmental and resource costs and benefits (ERCB) Monetary valuation Original valuation study Prioritisation Screening Standard values Valuation method The precise interpretation of this term is still subject of much debate. Different definitions for environmental costs and resource costs have been put forward by the 2002 Working Group on Water and Economics (WATECO) and the 2004 Drafting Group Eco2. For the definitions, see section 2.2. The process of assigning monetary values (expressed in Euro or other currencies) to changes in the environmental quality. For example: how many Euro and cents worth of benefit does it create to reduce nitrate concentration in a river below a critical threshold. Objects of valuation can be both environmental goods (e.g. a forest, a river, a wetland) or the environmental services they provide (e.g. nutrient retention, flow regulation). A study that is conducted in order to determine the monetary value of a change in the quality of a particular environmental good or service in a particular location, using one (or several) valuation methods The act of deciding what is most important to work on first. The act of deciding whether to include something within the scope of the analysis; it focuses on defining boundaries. It usually involves a decision which cases merit a detailed treatment, and which cases are clear-cut. Standard values are unitary values for particular costs or benefits that are centrally collected and applied to different situations without further adaptation (e.g. the cost of a standard fish pass or a standard filter). This can be seen as a crude form of benefits transfer. The methods that are used to assign a monetary value to a given change in environmental quality. Valuation methods try to infer the preferences that individuals attach to a certain good, and measure the strength of this preference. It is most difficult for goods that are not traded on a market. Common non-market valuation methods include contingent valuation, contingent choice, hedonic pricing or the travel cost approach. Thank you! 10