Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
5.8
3.0
Journals
Water
Special Issues
Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the...
water-logo
Submit to Water Review for Water Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

► Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser
share announcement

Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the EU Water Framework Directive

A special issue of Water (ISSN 2073-4441). This special issue belongs to the section "Water Resources Management, Policy and Governance".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (7 August 2020) | Viewed by 36432

Special Issue Editors

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mark Wiering

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Radboud University, Institute for Management Research, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Interests: environmental policy;water management; sustainability and societal transformations
Dr. Ann Crabbé

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
University of Antwerp, Centre for Research on Environmental and Social Change (CRESC), Belgium
Interests: environmental policy, water policies, policy evaluation, governance of sustainability
Dr. Daan Boezeman

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Radboud University, Institute for Management Research, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Interests: environmental, agricultural and climate policy & governance; science-policy interactions

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

With the Water Framework Directive (WFD), the European Union has set ambitious targets to get its water bodies in a good ecological status. With the final 2027 deadline approaching, less than half of European surface water bodies meet their goals, while progress is slow (EEA 2018).

While environmental or water agencies take hydro-morphological measures to restore habitat conditions, from fish traps to re-meandering, many emissions are regulated under other directives. While progress in water quality is being reported for point sources, diffuse pollution remains problematic. For control of sources of diffuse pollution originating from agriculture, i.e. fertilizers and pesticides, the WFD is, largely dependent on agricultural policy, e.g. developed under the Common Agricultural Policy, the Nitrates Directive or Directives with regard to pesticides.

This Special Issue aims to assess current progress and practices in aligning water quality management, especially the WFD, with agricultural policies across EU member states, stimulating the debate on the future of the WFD and the challenge of creating clean and healthy waters.

We welcome contributions engaging with the following topics:

  • How are implementing agencies dealing with this problem of not being able to directly intervene in diffuse pollution stemming from agricultural sources? Did they find good alternative ways to cope?
  • How are WFD related policies and practices connected to other policies on diffuse pollution, like the Nitrates Directive? Or remains diffuse pollution one of the major key problems inhibiting successful WFD implementation?

We welcome contributions on:

  • Innovative approaches in sector-integration in light of above alignments;
  • Comparative cases of implementing the WFD or Nitrate Directive in light of these issues or
Other reflections on sector integration of water and agriculture.

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mark Wiering
Dr. Ann Crabbé
Dr. Daan Boezeman
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Water is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Water Framework Directive
  • water quality
  • water bodies
  • diffuse pollution
  • nutrients
  • implementation
  • Nitrates Directive
  • fertilizers
  • pesticides
  • integrated management

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (7 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
7 pages, 224 KiB  
Editorial
Agricultural Diffuse Pollution and the EU Water Framework Directive: Problems and Progress in Governance
by Daan Boezeman, Mark Wiering and Ann Crabbé
Water 2020, 12(9), 2590; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12092590 - 16 Sep 2020
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2704
Abstract
Progress has been made on improving Europe’s water quality. Nevertheless, there is much scepticism as to whether the goals of the European Water Framework Directive will be realised by 2027. Addressing diffuse agricultural sources of pollution remains a persistent problem. The Special Issue [...] Read more.
Progress has been made on improving Europe’s water quality. Nevertheless, there is much scepticism as to whether the goals of the European Water Framework Directive will be realised by 2027. Addressing diffuse agricultural sources of pollution remains a persistent problem. The Special Issue “Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the EU Water Framework Directive” aims to advance the understanding of the different governance arrangements European Member States developed to address this problem. The contributions in this Special Issue focus on governance arrangements in Denmark, England, Flanders/Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Poland, The Netherlands, Norway and Scotland. The contributions address three themes. First, the contributions signal serious concerns with policy integration across policy domains. Second, it appears to be tough to prioritise source-based measures over effect-based measures of all sorts despite the principles embedded in the Directive. Third, scientific knowledge is an important ally for water interests, yet politicisation in power struggles looms. The contributions in the Special Issue offer reflections on the open, participatory, experimentalist governance that the WFD exemplifies. While most authors agree that this path is attractive and appropriate in some respects, questions can be raised as to whether it also avoids confrontations and hampers the effectiveness of policies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the EU Water Framework Directive)
12 pages, 246 KiB  
Review
The Water Framework Directive and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution: Fighting a Running Battle?
by Mark Wiering, Daan Boezeman and Ann Crabbé
Water 2020, 12(5), 1447; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12051447 - 19 May 2020
Cited by 30 | Viewed by 4879
Abstract
In order to provide a common ground for the Special Issue ‘Water quality and agricultural diffuse pollution in light of the EU Water Framework Directive,’ this review sets out to provide a concise overview of the academic literature on two topics. First, we [...] Read more.
In order to provide a common ground for the Special Issue ‘Water quality and agricultural diffuse pollution in light of the EU Water Framework Directive,’ this review sets out to provide a concise overview of the academic literature on two topics. First, we review the issues in the governance literature on the ‘wicked problem’ of diffuse agricultural sources focussing on three principles: (1) fragmentation and the distribution of power to address diffuse sources, (2) the problem of source-oriented and effect-oriented measures, and (3) contested knowledge for policies for diffuse sources. Second, we briefly sketch the literature on policy instruments and confront that with the scholarly understanding of addressing diffuse agricultural sources under the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the EU Water Framework Directive)
18 pages, 741 KiB  
Article
Integrated Water Quality Governance and Sectoral Responsibility: The EU Water Framework Directive’s Impact on Agricultural Sector Policies in Norway
by Sissel Hovik
Water 2019, 11(11), 2215; https://doi.org/10.3390/w11112215 - 24 Oct 2019
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 3569
Abstract
In accordance with the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), Norway has made the river basin the basis for coordination of sectoral policies. New units of River Basin Districts and Sub-Districts have been introduced. In each district, the joint water management plan and program [...] Read more.
In accordance with the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), Norway has made the river basin the basis for coordination of sectoral policies. New units of River Basin Districts and Sub-Districts have been introduced. In each district, the joint water management plan and program of measures is formulated by cross-sector and multi-level networks. This network structure is added to and clearly subordinated to the primary structure following the sectoral principle and hierarchical steering. Therefore, the WFD objectives of good environmental status of all waters must be integrated into the goal structure and policy priorities of different sector authorities and levels of government. This paper examines whether and, if so, how the activities within the secondary structure of water governance influence the policies and practices of the agricultural sector regarding diffuse water pollution mitigation. The analyses of sector policy documents and water management plans reveal that even though the WFD’s aim of good ecological status of water is integrated into the objectives of the agricultural environmental program, only minor changes have been made in instrument targets and settings. Economic incentives and voluntary measures still dominate. This leads to the conclusion that the corporatist governance mode of the agriculture sector dominates the sector’s choice of policy objectives and instruments. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the EU Water Framework Directive)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 735 KiB  
Article
Agricultural Nitrogen Pollution of Freshwater in Germany. The Governance of Sustaining a Complex Problem
by Sabrina Kirschke, Astrid Häger, Dieter Kirschke and Jeanette Völker
Water 2019, 11(12), 2450; https://doi.org/10.3390/w11122450 - 21 Nov 2019
Cited by 40 | Viewed by 7635
Abstract
The nitrogen pollution of freshwater heavily affects social–ecological systems. To reduce negative effects, research calls for an integrated approach, including a coherent and diverse set of governance instruments. Thus far, however, the effects of (non-)integration have been blurry. Taking Germany as an example, [...] Read more.
The nitrogen pollution of freshwater heavily affects social–ecological systems. To reduce negative effects, research calls for an integrated approach, including a coherent and diverse set of governance instruments. Thus far, however, the effects of (non-)integration have been blurry. Taking Germany as an example, this study sheds light on the actual complexity of the problem along five dimensions of complexity (goals, variables, dynamics, interconnections, and uncertainties). It also sheds light on related governance instruments (rules, information, and economic incentives) and their impacts on problem-solving (implementation of specific measures). Analyses include expert interviews on complexity, European water and agricultural policies, and official data on the planning and implementation of measures to reduce nitrogen concentrations. Results show Germany’s path of sustaining a complex problem by using a non-coherent and low diversity governance approach, avoiding rigorous rules, and barely using economic instruments to deal with nitrogen surpluses. A stronger integration of water and agricultural policies, as well as a better use of economic instruments, are suggested to enhance water quality in the future. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the EU Water Framework Directive)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

25 pages, 1012 KiB  
Article
Implementing the Water Framework Directive and Tackling Diffuse Pollution from Agriculture: Lessons from England and Scotland
by Laura De Vito, Malcolm Fairbrother and Duncan Russel
Water 2020, 12(1), 244; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12010244 - 15 Jan 2020
Cited by 23 | Viewed by 6862
Abstract
Tackling diffuse pollution from agriculture is a key challenge for governments seeking to implement the European Union’s Water Framework Directive (WFD). In the research literature, how best to integrate and align effective measures for tackling diffuse pollution, within the context of the EU’s [...] Read more.
Tackling diffuse pollution from agriculture is a key challenge for governments seeking to implement the European Union’s Water Framework Directive (WFD). In the research literature, how best to integrate and align effective measures for tackling diffuse pollution, within the context of the EU’s multilevel governance structure, remains an open question. This paper focuses on the first and second implementation cycles of the WFD to explore how national governance arrangements either facilitated or hindered the adoption of effective policies, especially with regards to the delivery of agricultural and water policies on the ground. It draws on data collected through systematic document analysis and interviews with key experts, policymakers and interest groups, and presents a comparative analysis of two case studies: England and Scotland. The case studies show that Scotland’s joined-up governance structure, which enabled policymakers and interest groups to work together and to build trust and cooperation, facilitated the adoption of stricter measures for tackling diffuse pollution. In contrast, in England institutional fragmentation prevented a meaningful engagement of all parties and acted as a barrier. The analysis unpacks the design of policy mixes and the conditions that allow national governments to pursue more holistic and integrated governance approaches to overcome opposition from interest groups and gain their support. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the EU Water Framework Directive)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 346 KiB  
Article
The Wicked Problem the Water Framework Directive Cannot Solve. The Governance Approach in Dealing with Pollution of Nutrients in Surface Water in the Netherlands, Flanders, Lower Saxony, Denmark and Ireland
by Mark Wiering, Duncan Liefferink, Daan Boezeman, Maria Kaufmann, Ann Crabbé and Nanda Kurstjens
Water 2020, 12(5), 1240; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12051240 - 26 Apr 2020
Cited by 34 | Viewed by 6255
Abstract
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) is typically a framework directive that tries to encourage integration of policies for water quality and agriculture. Nutrients (nitrates, phosphates) from agricultural sources remain a ‘wicked problem’ in realizing the aims of the WFD, partly because the directive [...] Read more.
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) is typically a framework directive that tries to encourage integration of policies for water quality and agriculture. Nutrients (nitrates, phosphates) from agricultural sources remain a ‘wicked problem’ in realizing the aims of the WFD, partly because the directive has to rely on other, neighboring policies to tackle to problem pressure of nutrients; it seems to lack instruments and measures to directly intervene in relevant agricultural policies. This contribution describes the different governance approaches of five member states and regions (The Netherlands, Flanders in Belgium, Lower Saxony- in Germany, Denmark and Ireland) to the nutrients problem and specifically focuses on the relationship between the nature of governance and the nature of measures taken. On the one hand, countries can vary in terms of a more consensual or antagonistic approach to dealing with water quality and diffuse pollution by agriculture, and emphasize more integration or separation in organization and programs. On the other hand, they can vary in the ‘outcomes’ in terms of more source-based measures or effect-based measures and the emphasis in policy instruments used. This article is based on the screening of policy documents, 44 interviews and several (international) feedback workshops. We found a great variety in governance approaches, while the nature of measures, in terms of source-based and effect-based, is only slightly different. On closer inspection, there are interesting differences in the consensual or antagonist discourses and differences in the use of more mandatory instruments or area-based policies. In many countries, the major challenge is to strike a balance between taking source-based measures, where necessary, and accommodating the difficult situations farmers very often find themselves in, as the reduction of nutrients (as a source-based measure) use can lead to lower yields and higher costs for manure disposal. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the EU Water Framework Directive)
26 pages, 2029 KiB  
Article
Nitrate Management Discourses in Poland and Denmark—Laggards or Leaders in Water Quality Protection?
by Emilia Noel Ptak, Morten Graversgaard, Jens Christian Refsgaard and Tommy Dalgaard
Water 2020, 12(9), 2371; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12092371 - 24 Aug 2020
Cited by 21 | Viewed by 3474
Abstract
The most significant source of nitrate pollution in the European Union (EU) is attributed to agricultural activities, which threaten drinking water, marine, and freshwater resources. The Nitrates Directive is a key feature of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), which seeks to reduce nitrate [...] Read more.
The most significant source of nitrate pollution in the European Union (EU) is attributed to agricultural activities, which threaten drinking water, marine, and freshwater resources. The Nitrates Directive is a key feature of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), which seeks to reduce nitrate pollution from agricultural sources. Yet, weak compliance by Member States (MS) diminishes the legitimacy of the EU environmental acquis and undermines efforts to achieve environmental objectives. This study examines the nitrate management discourse in Poland to identify influencing factors that impact governance capacity and overall compliance performance. The empirical investigation is based on nine stakeholder interviews, three written correspondences, and a literature review that collectively comprise an evaluation study. A comparison in governance approaches between Poland and Denmark provides a calibration in assessing performance respective to another MS. The findings categorize both Poland and Denmark as “laggard” in WFD compliance. This case contributes new insights in identifying 6 enabling and 13 constraining factors affecting the ability of MS to fulfill their implementation duties. The findings demonstrate that divergent stakeholder views based on historical and cultural norms require a differentiated approach tailored to domestic conditions for effective fulfillment of the objectives set forth in EU environmental legislation. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Water Quality and Agricultural Diffuse Pollution in Light of the EU Water Framework Directive)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-7
Back to TopTop