In the work package ‘Best Management Practices’, lead by PGI-PIB, WaterProtect reviewed and evaluated the current farming systems and the promoted good management practices to improve the water quality in the seven WaterProtect action labs. The observations and remarks stated in the final report can be useful for the development of new EU regulations on water and agriculture.
‘The General summary of BMPs issues for consideration in the work package 'Upscaling on EU level’ is the final report of a series of deliverables that have been delivered on the project research on best management practices. The report delivers a summary of findings from the seven action labs and links it to a series of twenty questions for reflection.
Findings
Although the findings and conclusions can impossibly be representative for the farming catchments in the entire EU, they seem useful for all stakeholders involved in the formulation of future changes to the EU regulations aimed at water-agriculture/food nexus.
These are the findings:
- Actions on local level require change in regulation or organisation at a higher level
It became apparent that many actions to promote good farming practices, although designed and needed to be taken at local scale, require changes in regulations or organisation at a higher than a local level.
- Programmes to protect water sources are often too general to address local issues
The researched programmes of actions/measures often seem too general to address issues at local levels and are not applicable in practice. This makes them less effective because of a multiplicity of regulations and a lack of coherence between various policy areas.
- Inclusion in the decision making process is crucial
The inclusion of society in the decision making process can be very beneficial for the effectiveness of
actions. Farmers and stakeholders from WaterProtect action labs who actively participated in the
project were more open for discussions and more willing to take actions because of their higher awareness. Local institutions need to develop better relations with local communities and the first and most important action is the dissemination of monitoring results and awareness raising about the environmental problems in surrounding area.
- Strengthen the control mechanisms
Strengthening the control mechanisms is absolutely required. Not to punish those who do not follow the rules, but rather to acknowledge farmers who follow legislations and eco-friendly protocols, which will encourage these farmers to continue these good practices.
- Governments need to support the implementation of measures by cost sharing
More help from governments is needed with respect to cost sharing of implementation of measures f.e. giving funding for environmental measures. This specifically refers to expensive and more complex measures such as e.g. purification systems.
- A common driver facilitates sustainable water management
The success of local actions is more likely to sustain when common drivers for sustainable water management already exist. As an example the action lab from Italy can be taken, where farmers face the situation of water pollution that is threating their wine production. There is only one source of water and it is in their common interest to protect this resource, which drives efforts of all farmers in the catchment.
- Sustainable water management in farming entails an additional price
More sustainable food production entails an additional price and it is necessary that consumers and the entire food production chains become aware of this and pay this additional price for these more sustainable products to keep farming economically viable.
- A long term vision is necessary
On many occasions it has been brought to the attention of the project team that a long term vision for the environmental protection is necessary to convince farmers to undertake actions towards more sustainable farming. The time needed for changes in the environment last longer than a term of office of any government to happen and therefore guaranteeing continuity is very important.
- Continuity of approaches
The continuity of the approach, even when some modifications are required, is needed for successful implementations of programmes of measures. Local institutions and policies shall be less dependent on changes on national level.
These findings were also linked to a series of 20 questions for reflection:
A. Is the river basin planning allowing for correct identification of problems at a catchment
scale?
B. Are monitoring programmes not too generic if designed at a water body level?
C. Are implementing regulations efficient at national and regional/local scales?
D. Is the regulation developed at national scales applicable in practice at local level?
E. Shall the regulations at EU level be more coordinated and interdisciplinary and be working
for a common goal?
F. Would regulation, organisation of works and data exchange at local scales be more
effective if governmental departments were aggregated into more interdisciplinary
departments?
G. Shall there be more regulations that require data sharing and obligation for public data to
be available not on a request but easily accessible via ICT tools for all stakeholders?
H. Can the EU regulations stronger induce the requirement for stakeholder participation and
awareness raising with local stakeholders such as farmers in environmental protection?
I. Shall information about quality of the local environmental be compulsorily distributed
among citizens/stakeholders?
J. Can the monitoring network be fine-tuned aiming to be used for raising local awareness?
K. Shall the EU regulations regarding control mechanisms be stricter or shall they require a
higher number of controls to be performed?
L. Can the EU think about a reward system for farmers who are committed and take
measures for water protection to stimulate them to continue (eg. less or less striker
controls if farmers have already proven to do right things)?
M. Shall the EU regulations ensure more resources for measures that require cooperation
between farmers and collaboration between farmers and local governments?
N. Can the EU support economic drivers that would reward farmers for sustainable
production (eg. via compensations in the new Common Agricultural Policy)?
O. Can the EU work on certification systems for food production based on environmental
footprint assessment, which will help to identify products produced with lower
environmental impact and allow consumers for making conscious decisions based on
scientific evidence?
P. Can we think of a leadership structure at local scales that could be supported by economic
instruments such as the CAP?
Q. Can the EU help to enforce a fair price for more sustainable products?
R. Can the EU help to improve consumer awareness on more sustainable EU-products?
S. Can the EU regulations stronger induce the continuity of approaches on Member States
with respect to implementation of environmental policies?
T. How can we strengthen the position of local scientific expertise in water management at a
catchment scale?
