- -

Too expensive to be worth it? A methodology to identify disproportionate costs of environmental measures as applied to the Middle Tagus River, Spain

RiuNet: Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

Compartir/Enviar a

Citas

Estadísticas

  • Estadisticas de Uso

Too expensive to be worth it? A methodology to identify disproportionate costs of environmental measures as applied to the Middle Tagus River, Spain

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Ficheros en el ítem

[Cerrado]
Nombre: Bolinches;De;Paredes ...
Tamaño: 1.121Mb
Formato: PDF
Descripción: Versión editorial
Solicitar una copia al autor
dc.contributor.author Bolinches, Antonio es_ES
dc.contributor.author De Stefano, Lucia es_ES
dc.contributor.author Paredes Arquiola, Javier es_ES
dc.date.accessioned 2020-10-05T07:00:02Z
dc.date.available 2020-10-05T07:00:02Z
dc.date.issued 2020-11-09 es_ES
dc.identifier.issn 0964-0568 es_ES
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10251/151097
dc.description.abstract [EN] The European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive (WFD) established in 2000 that EU Member States should achieve good status for all their water bodies by 2027 at the latest. The competent authorities are obliged to commit the necessary resources to achieve this goal. In water bodies where the costs are deemed disproportionate, the Directive foresees the definition of exemptions. Two decades after approval of the WFD, however, there is no common method across the EU to evaluate the disproportionality of costs and define the associated exemptions. We propose a methodology based on WFD indicators of water body status and economic variables that are common to all the EU countries. The method uses data that is already available in Eurostat and European Environment Agency databases, thus minimizing data collection costs. The method is applied to the Middle Tagus (Spain), where currently there are several water bodies with declared exemptions for disproportionate costs. es_ES
dc.description.sponsorship The authors wish to thank the Tagus River Basin Authority (Confederación Hidrográfica del Tajo) for their availability and readiness to share information, and three anonymous reviewers for their valuable and constructive comments. es_ES
dc.language Inglés es_ES
dc.publisher Taylor & Francis es_ES
dc.relation.ispartof Journal of Environmental Planning and Management es_ES
dc.rights Reserva de todos los derechos es_ES
dc.subject Water Framework Directive es_ES
dc.subject Disproportionate costs es_ES
dc.subject Less stringent objectives es_ES
dc.subject Tagus es_ES
dc.subject.classification INGENIERIA HIDRAULICA es_ES
dc.title Too expensive to be worth it? A methodology to identify disproportionate costs of environmental measures as applied to the Middle Tagus River, Spain es_ES
dc.type Artículo es_ES
dc.identifier.doi 10.1080/09640568.2020.1726731 es_ES
dc.rights.accessRights Cerrado es_ES
dc.contributor.affiliation Universitat Politècnica de València. Departamento de Ingeniería Hidráulica y Medio Ambiente - Departament d'Enginyeria Hidràulica i Medi Ambient es_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitation Bolinches, A.; De Stefano, L.; Paredes Arquiola, J. (2020). Too expensive to be worth it? A methodology to identify disproportionate costs of environmental measures as applied to the Middle Tagus River, Spain. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 63(13):2402-2424. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2020.1726731 es_ES
dc.description.accrualMethod S es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversion https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2020.1726731 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio 2402 es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin 2424 es_ES
dc.type.version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion es_ES
dc.description.volume 63 es_ES
dc.description.issue 13 es_ES
dc.relation.pasarela S\406772 es_ES
dc.description.references Almansa, C., & Martínez-Paz, J. M. (2011). What weight should be assigned to future environmental impacts? A probabilistic cost benefit analysis using recent advances on discounting. Science of The Total Environment, 409(7), 1305-1314. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.12.004 es_ES
dc.description.references Berbel, J., & Expósito, A. (2017). Economic challenges for the EU Water Framework Directive reform and implementation. European Planning Studies, 26(1), 20-34. doi:10.1080/09654313.2017.1364353 es_ES
dc.description.references Boeuf, B., Fritsch, O., & Martin-Ortega, J. (2016). Undermining European Environmental Policy Goals? The EU Water Framework Directive and the Politics of Exemptions. Water, 8(9), 388. doi:10.3390/w8090388 es_ES
dc.description.references Bolinches, A., De Stefano, L., & Paredes-Arquiola, J. (2020). Designing river water quality policy interventions with scarce data: the case of the Middle Tagus Basin, Spain. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 65(5), 749-762. doi:10.1080/02626667.2019.1708915 es_ES
dc.description.references Brouwer, R. (2008). The potential role of stated preference methods in the Water Framework Directive to assess disproportionate costs. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 51(5), 597-614. doi:10.1080/09640560802207860 es_ES
dc.description.references CHG Confederación Hidrográfica del Guadiana. 2015. “Anejo 12 Del Plan Hidrológico. Objetivos Medioambientales y Exenciones.” http://planhidrologico2015.chguadiana.es/corps/planhidrologico2015/data/resources/file/documentos2015/definitivos/segundaetapa/RPH_14_1Rev-T2-Ane12_OMAs_vf.pdf. es_ES
dc.description.references CHT Confederación Hidrografica del Tajo. 2018a. “Memoria de Documentos Iniciales: Programa, Calendario, Estudio General Sobre La Demarcación y Fórmulas de Consulta. Plan Hidrológico de La Demarcación Hidrográfica Del Tajo Revisión de Tercer Ciclo (2021-2027).” http://www.chtajo.es/LaCuenca/Planes/PlanHidrologico/Planif_2021-2027/Documents/Doc_Iniciales/20181019_DocumentosinicialesTERCERcicloMEMORIA.pdf. es_ES
dc.description.references CHT Confederación Hidrografica del Tajo. 2018b. “Resultados/Informes: Aguas Superficiales - Control Fisicoquímico.” 2018. http://www.chtajo.es/LaCuenca/CalidadAgua/Resultados_Informes/Paginas/RISupFisicoQuímico.aspx. es_ES
dc.description.references Courtecuisse, Arnaud. 2005. “Water Prices and Households’ Available Income: Key Indicators for the Assessment of Potential Disproportionate Costs-Illustration from the Artois-Picardie Basin (France).” Paper presented at the IWG-Env International Work Session on Water Statistics. Vienna, June 20-22. http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/environment/envpdf/pap_wasess5b3france.pdf es_ES
dc.description.references European Commission. 2008. Guide to Cost Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects. Luxembourg: EC. es_ES
dc.description.references European Commission. 2009. Guidance Document No. 20, on Exemptions to the Environmental Objectives. Luxembourg: EC. es_ES
dc.description.references European Commission. 2010. “Compliance Costs of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive.” http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-urbanwaste/info/pdf/Cost of UWWTD-Final report_2010.pdf. es_ES
dc.description.references European Commission. 2019. “SWD(2019) 30 Final. COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT European Overview: River Basin Management Plans.” Brussels: EC. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=SWD:2019:30:FIN&qid=1551267381862&from=EN. es_ES
dc.description.references European Environment Agency. 2019a. “Natura 2000 Data: The European Network of Protected Sites.” 2019. https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/natura-10#tab-gis-data. es_ES
dc.description.references European Environment Agency. 2019b. “WISE WFD Database (Water Framework Directive Database).” 2019. https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/wise-wfd-3. es_ES
dc.description.references European Parliament and Council. 2000. “Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 Establishing a Framework for Community Action in the Field of Water Policy.” OJ, no. L 327: 2014–7001. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02000L0060-20141120&from=EN. es_ES
dc.description.references European Water Directors. 2016. “WFD Reporting Guidance 2016.” http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu/help/WFD/WFD_521_2016/Guidance/WFD_ReportingGuidance.pdf. es_ES
dc.description.references European Water Directors. 2019. The Future of the Water Framework Directive (WFD): Water Directors Input to the Fitness Check Process on Experiences and Challenges of WFD’s Implementation and Options for the Way Forward. Brussels: European Water Directors. es_ES
dc.description.references Eurostat. 2019. “Database: Eurostat.” 2019. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/environment/environmental-protection-expenditure/database. es_ES
dc.description.references Feld, C. K., Segurado, P., & Gutiérrez-Cánovas, C. (2016). Analysing the impact of multiple stressors in aquatic biomonitoring data: A ‘cookbook’ with applications in R. Science of The Total Environment, 573, 1320-1339. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.243 es_ES
dc.description.references Galioto, F., Marconi, V., Raggi, M., & Viaggi, D. (2013). An Assessment of Disproportionate Costs in WFD: The Experience of Emilia-Romagna. Water, 5(4), 1967-1995. doi:10.3390/w5041967 es_ES
dc.description.references Görlach, By Benjamin, and Britta Pielen. 2007. “Disproportionate Costs in the EC Water Framework Directive: The Concept and Its Practical Implementation.” Paper presented at the Environmental Economics Conference, London, March 23, 2007. es_ES
dc.description.references Hering, D., Borja, A., Carstensen, J., Carvalho, L., Elliott, M., Feld, C. K., … Pont, D. (2010). The European Water Framework Directive at the age of 10: A critical review of the achievements with recommendations for the future. Science of The Total Environment, 408(19), 4007-4019. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.05.031 es_ES
dc.description.references Hernández-Sancho, F., Molinos-Senante, M., & Sala-Garrido, R. (2010). Economic valuation of environmental benefits from wastewater treatment processes: An empirical approach for Spain. Science of The Total Environment, 408(4), 953-957. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.10.028 es_ES
dc.description.references INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística. 2018a. “Cifras Oficiales de Población Resultantes de La Revisión Del Padrón Municipal.” 2018. https://www.ine.es/jaxiT3/Tabla.htm?t=2881&L=0. es_ES
dc.description.references INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística. 2018b. “Survey on Water Supply and Sewerage.” 2018. http://www.ine.es/dynt3/inebase/index.htm?type=pcaxis&path=/t26/p069/p03/serie&file=pcaxis&L=1. es_ES
dc.description.references Jähnig, S. C., Brabec, K., Buffagni, A., Erba, S., Lorenz, A. W., Ofenböck, T., … Hering, D. (2010). A comparative analysis of restoration measures and their effects on hydromorphology and benthic invertebrates in 26 central and southern European rivers. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(3), 671-680. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01807.x es_ES
dc.description.references Jensen, C. L., Jacobsen, B. H., Olsen, S. B., Dubgaard, A., & Hasler, B. (2013). A practical CBA-based screening procedure for identification of river basins where the costs of fulfilling the WFD requirements may be disproportionate – applied to the case of Denmark. Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2(2), 164-200. doi:10.1080/21606544.2013.785676 es_ES
dc.description.references Klauer, B., Sigel, K., & Schiller, J. (2016). Disproportionate costs in the EU Water Framework Directive—How to justify less stringent environmental objectives. Environmental Science & Policy, 59, 10-17. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2016.01.017 es_ES
dc.description.references Macháč, J., & Brabec, J. (2017). Assessment of Disproportionate Costs According to the WFD: Comparison of Applications of two Approaches in the Catchment of the Stanovice Reservoir (Czech Republic). Water Resources Management, 32(4), 1453-1466. doi:10.1007/s11269-017-1879-z es_ES
dc.description.references Martin-Ortega, J., Skuras, D., Perni, A., Holen, S., & Psaltopoulos, D. (2014). The Disproportionality Principle in the WFD: How to Actually Apply it? Economics of Water Management in Agriculture, 214-256. doi:10.1201/b17309-14 es_ES
dc.description.references Molinos-Senante, M., Hernández-Sancho, F., & Sala-Garrido, R. (2010). Economic feasibility study for wastewater treatment: A cost–benefit analysis. Science of The Total Environment, 408(20), 4396-4402. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.07.014 es_ES
dc.description.references OECD. 2009. Managing Water for All: An OECD Perspective on Pricing. Paris: OECD. es_ES
dc.description.references PALMER, M. A., MENNINGER, H. L., & BERNHARDT, E. (2010). River restoration, habitat heterogeneity and biodiversity: a failure of theory or practice? Freshwater Biology, 55, 205-222. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02372.x es_ES
dc.description.references Renno, J., and B. Klauer. 2018. “EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Eine Vertiefte Analyse Der Beiden Leipziger Ansätze Zur Begründung von Ausnahmen Mit Der Unverhältnismäßigkeit Der Kosten,” no. 4. https://www.ufz.de/index.php?de=20939&pub_id=21203. es_ES
dc.description.references Roumboutsos, A. B. (2010). Sustainability, Social Discount Rates and the Selection of Project Procurement Method. International Advances in Economic Research, 16(2), 165-174. doi:10.1007/s11294-009-9250-7 es_ES
dc.description.references Segurado, P., Almeida, C., Neves, R., Ferreira, M. T., & Branco, P. (2018). Understanding multiple stressors in a Mediterranean basin: Combined effects of land use, water scarcity and nutrient enrichment. Science of The Total Environment, 624, 1221-1233. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.201 es_ES
dc.description.references Thaler, T., Boteler, B., Dworak, T., Holen, S., & Lago, M. (2013). Investigating the use of environmental benefits in the policy decision process: a qualitative study focusing on the EU water policy. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 57(10), 1515-1530. doi:10.1080/09640568.2013.816271 es_ES


Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem