| sei qui: HOME > convegni > "Partecipazione pubblica nell'attuazione della Direttiva comunitaria sulle acque 2000/60/CE" > English Summary |
Public participation and the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive 2000/60 in Italy
Conclusions of the conference organized by Gruppo 183 association and the IEFE Bocconi institute, in Milan the 30 th of May 2005. drafted by Chiara Sorisi for Gruppo 183.
Which are the conditions and requirements to implement public participation in Italian water management and planning, how can public participation contribute to creating an effective and efficient management system, and what are the specific features of public participation in the water sector? These are the main challenges that the Italian water management system is facing, and these were the questions addressed during the conference organized by Gruppo 183 association and IEFE Bocconi institute in Milan, the 30th of May 2005.
Public participation in water policy
The conference was opened with a review of the origins of the concept of public participation in environmental decision making and its connection with sustainable development, from the Declaration of Rio de Janeiro in 1992, to the UN Johannesburg Summit in 2002, from the Aahrus Convention of 1998, to the EU Directives implementing the same concept, and the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Public participation in environmental decision making constitutes a great value as it provides enrichment of administrative processes, encourages social learning, expands policy options, facilitates accountability and transparency, provides consensus on administrative matters, and therefore it contributes to guarantee compliance and enforcement [ Edoardo Croci, IEFE Bocconi].
In the Italian water sector, there is a great crisis in both policy and decision making, and in planning and enforcing. Traditional Command & Control strategies and the increased fragmentation of the Italian administrative legal system have resulted in a lack of consensus for legitimate action by Institutions; a lack of financing, as the Sate is no longer capable of subsidise the system and problems of incompliance and enforcement of water management plans. These conditions result in a lack of efficiency in the functioning of the whole water management system. Such limitations could be partly overcome with the introduction of public participation instruments, following the example of other European Nations such as France, Germany, the Nederland's and the United Kingdom, where they have been successfully implemented.
Public participation can be implemented at different stages. Initially it could mean accountability, transparency and access to relevant information. It could also mean communication among the various stakeholders who carry specific interests or competences in water management sector. At a higher level, it could mean public consultation during decision making processes. More in depth, it can involve the public at a deliberative stage, by assigning them impeditive power (veto), or even co-decision. However, in order to be efficient and operational, public participation has to be institutionalized at legislative level and has to be modelled, with the intervention of specific expertise, and subsequently adapted to local features. In this way, public participation can be the key to help bringing conflicts and confrontation among the various stakeholders into the planning and management activity, therefore avoiding them to prevent the system from functioning. [Antonio Massarutto, University of Udine, IEFE Bocconi].
Various approaches to public participation in water management have been experimented within Italy, especially in the Veneto Region, where they have been promoted by the Italian Association for a better culture and quality of the rivers (CIRF). The aim of these various initiatives was to involve the public in the planning system at different stages, in order to increase consensus for the administrative bodies and subsequently to guarantee compliance and enforcement. CIRF witnessed positive outcomes in various cases of this nature, like the establishment of a local Agenda 21 to support the planning activities of the River Basin Authority; or like the promotion of River Contracts, which raised confrontation among the various stakeholders involved in water management [Erich Trevisol, CIRF and IUAV Venice University].
The main requirement to guarantee operational efficiency and effective public participation is to model participatory processes, in order to avoid failures in the system. A model facilitates the interaction between science, administrative bodies and stakeholders, by planning the process step by step. The Mulino project, for example, modelled the process in five stages: a) problem exploration, b) analysis and evaluation matrices, c) decision rule - ranking, d) sensitivity analysis, e) sustainability analysis. The NetSyMod project, which followed the Mulino project and is still at an experimental stage, aims to model even more in details the participatory process trough: a) identification of actors, b) social network analysis, c) creative system modelling – brainstorming, d) analysis of the option – sensitivity and sustainability analysis, e) final outcomes. It is important to test the model in various case studies, to adapt it at every single local situation [Carlo Giupponi, University of Milan].
Experiences of public participation in water management in Italy
Public participation experiences in Italy usually manifested in three different ways: 1) as a tool for supporting the competent Authorities; 2) at the level of coordination between institutional public bodies; 3) as an instrument to coordinate all the various stakeholders involved. Examples for each type have been presented at the conference.
1) The Consulting Committee of the Po River was created in 1994, to allow representants of various stakeholders to support the River Basin Authority in its decision making. The Committee is not officially involved in the planning and managing activity itself, as it is built as a consulting body; however, the Authority takes into great account the Committee's opinions and sets meeting each month [Francesco Tornatore, Consulting Committee of the Po River].
The HarmoniCOP case study of the Bacchiglione's and Laguna's Optimal Management Unit Authorities , and their promotion of participation in planning activity, was presented. In the case of Bacchiglione, the participatory process originated because of strong local opposition to the installation of a waste water treatment plant. The first action of the Optimal Management Unity Authority was to promote meetings among administrative authorities and experts in order to solve this problem (Operational Technical Group). Following these meetings, and due to the high level of interest manifested by the public, new meetings and workshops were organised, open to a larger variety of subjects, from technicians to representants of fishermen's and environmental associations. The result of this second stage of the process was the issuing of the Optimal Management Unit Plan. Following this example, the Laguna Optimal Management Unit Authority promoted from the beginning a wide participatory process in order to issue the Optimal Management Unit Plan. Regular meetings took place with the participation of a wide range of stakeholders, including farmers' associations and industry representatives. Training courses for the public body's employees were organized, together with the developing of an Agenda21 process. In order to guarantee a successful implementation process, it is important that such experiences do not remain isolated or limited, and that the development of a continuous dialogue between the authorities and the stakeholders is promoted [Alessandro de Carli, IEFE Bocconi].
2) As an example of coordination between institutional public bodies, the case of the Puglia-Basilicata Regions Agreement was presented. The agreement was reached in 1999 between the two Regions, in order to administer water transfers from the Basilicata to the Puglia Region. As a consequence, a new management Authority was created in 2001; planning activity is carried out at the level of the river basin unit, considering the natural resources and infrastructures existent as a whole system. Under the agreement, a jointed revision of the tariffs' system has been carried out, including cost of water supplies and sanitation services, environmental costs and costs of water usage, as required by the WFD. However, the analysis is considered to be far from accurate and will need to be subsequently revised. This example of institutional coordination, even if it does not include stakeholders' participation, constitutes an important reference as a way of implementing the WFD promoted by the regional governments themselves without the intervention of the State [Mario Rosario Mazzola, University of Palermo].
3) The River Contracts are water planning and management tools promoted by the Lombardia Region in the years 2002-2004 to pursue the Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM), as stated by the WFD, which involves the participation of various stakeholders. The regional law 2/2003 introduced the possibility of carrying out a “negotiating planning” process in Lombardia, through the introduction of new bodies like a Coordination Committee, which includes all the institutional public subjects involved in water management, and a Technical supporting Committee. This experience, even though most of the times it has not been open to public participation in general, but was restricted to the competent authorities and technicians, is of great values as it facilitates communication and networking among the competent authorities. It models a different way of decision making and promotes the integration of various local policies, pursuing the final aim of achieving IWRM as stated by the WFD [Andrea Calori, Politecnico of Milan].
Round table
The final round table provided an opportunity for all the participants and representants of different public bodies and stakeholders associations to contribute to the debate about the necessity of introducing public participation in water management and planning in Italy. At the same time, each participant exposed the problems that his association or organization is facing in implementing the WFD.
Giuseppe D'Occhio, Secretary of the Liri-Garigliano-Volturno River basin Authority , underlined the considerable contrast existing in Italy between the promotional activities of the Academia and the indifference and inertia of the institutional authorities regarding the problem of water management and planning. The Italian system is still trying to implement the law n. 183/1989. Moreover, the central authorities like the State and the Regions left the local authorities without guidance. He claimed for the River basin Authorities to become more cohesive, promoting and active bodies.
The intervention of Sergio Baratti, of the National Association for Irrigation and Land Reclamation, ANBI, focused on the lack of implementation of the “polluter pays” principle in Italy in relation to the problem of water pricing. He requested that the EU, together with the Italian Regions, study and institutionalize different pricing for different types of irrigation systems.
Nicola Stolfi, representative of the Italian Farmers Confederation (Confagricoltura) and CIA, argued for a more participative planning and management process, which should not exclude farmers.
Alberto Cervi, member of the Gruppo Giovani di Assolombarda , the Junior Association of the Lombardia Region's Entrepreneurs , described the problems that industry has to face in understanding and complying with regulations, together with a lack of guidance from the authorities. Moreover, there is no clarity regarding roles and competences, and therefore there is no clear liability of the authorities.
Ennio Fano, manager of the environment division in ENEL , the National Electricity Agency , pointed out that there is no coordination between the various European Directives in the water sector, and that they are too restrictive for the energy sector.
Renato Drusiani, manager of Federgasacqua , the Association of Water & Energy Supply Operators, underlined the serious nature of the crisis in the water sector, which now prevents the system from functioning correctly. A way to overcome the inefficiency of the central authorities is to decentralize competences.
Roberto Passino, Director of the IRSA, of National Research Council (CNR), underlined the importance of locating and characterizing the various stakeholders who have to be part of the planning and management process, in order to guaranty the effectiveness of the results. In addition, he pointed out the inability of the Regions to promote the implementation of the WFD.
Claudio Falasca, for the CGIL Union, suggested that, in order to be efficient, public participation has to be based on the principle of representativity and liability.
Andrea Agapito Ludovici, for the WWF Italy, proposed that the planning process as stated in the WFD has to be implemented even if the Directive itself has not been transposed into national law, in order to issue new River Basin Management Plans in 2009. The role of the River Basin Authorities has to be incremented and not diminished, as the central authorities are trying to do.
Bonatti, for the ENEA , the Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Environment, expressed his concern for the lack of accurate data and a suitable measurement systems.
Giuseppe Torchio, for the Italian Provinces Association and for the National Association of Town Councils , expressed the need for public representants in the institutional authorities themselves and the need for modelling the water management system on business firms' example.
Conclusions
The complexity of public participation is at the same time its most problematic feature and a great potential of enrichment, as it constitutes a capability of bringing together contrasting views and necessities. Due to its complexity, public participation has to be institutionalized, modelled and administered; this is the only way to guarantee it is efficient and operative. Moreover, it has to be taken into account that participation does not mean democracy: participation is a tool to bring into existence democratic decision making processes. Public participation does not mean decision making: it facilitates consensus and subsequently legitimates public authorities' action. Public participation means efficacy, as it raises consensus; as a result, participative decisions are more likely to be fully implemented. Public participation means information and communications as it brings together science, public authorities and local culture.
From the conclusions of the congress, concrete proposals have been put forward to Italian policy makers in order to promote public participation in the water sector. First of all, representative bodies of all the stakeholders should be established in each river basin district, with at least a consultation role. The dialogue has to be pursued by scheduling regular meetings with the competent authorities. Subsequently, in order to model and organize the public participatory systems, new expertise, funding and budgeting have to be employed. An accurate and institutionalized evaluation process has to be established and organized in order to constantly monitor the correspondence between planning and results achieved. This can be achieved with the support of economic tools (i.e. sustainability final balance), and with technological and interactive systems (i.e. GIS). Last but not least, professional training of experts and administrators must not be disregarded. [Antonio Massarutto, University of Udine, IEFE Bocconi Institute].
However, to cover the gap of inefficiency where the Italian water sector has been left in the previous years, Italy has to begin with legislative reforms and innovations and, above all, the implementation of the WFD. Italy has not transferred the WFD into its legal system; as a result, it has not started the characterisation process, the first stage of the implementation process. The Gruppo 183, the IEFE Bocconi institute and the University of Udine presented a proposal that aims to facilitate the start of the WFD implementation process. The proposal focuses on the redistribution of administrative and managing powers among public bodies in charge of water management, and aims to strengthen the role of the River Basin Authorities as optimal management units. This redistribution will allow the unification of planning power (now detained by the River Basin Authorities) and power of administer and manage water and land (now fragmented among different regional and local public bodies), the first step towards the establishment of an IWRM system. The Regions seem to be the most appropriate administrative public bodies to promote such action, and to move the Italian water management system towards the implementation of the WFD [Giuseppe Gavioli, Gruppo 183].
KB 443