Questionnaire: National Approaches to
Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs
and Benefits according to the WFD
Name
Address
Job Title
Institution
Department
Telephone
Country
Fax
Email
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 http://www.aquamoney.org.
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. +49 30 86880-147
Fax: +49 30 86880-100
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)?
[Insert text here. Use as much space as you need.]
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.
[Insert text here. Use as much space as you need.]
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:
[specify tasks, if necessary]
___ Mostly by local-level staff without economic expertise:
[specify tasks, if necessary]
___ Mostly by centralised agency of economic experts:
[specify tasks, if necessary]
___ Mostly by consultants with economic expertise:
[specify tasks, if necessary]
___ 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:
[specify tasks, if necessary]
___ Mostly by local-level staff without economic expertise:
[specify tasks, if necessary]
___ Mostly by centralised agency of economic experts:
[specify tasks, if necessary]
___ Mostly by consultants with economic expertise:
[specify tasks, if necessary]
___ Not yet decided / other [please specify].
Thank you!
2
Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD
1.5
OPTIONAL – if information 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.
[Insert text here. Use as much space as you need.]
Part 2: Use of Definitions and Guidance Documents
This section addresses the guidance material and information that you currently use to
support the process of valuing environmental and resource costs and benefits. The
information 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
Term
[Please insert your definition here. Use as much space as you need.]
WATECO definition
DG ECO 2 definition
Environmental
costs
“The costs of damage
that water uses impose
on the environment and
ecosystems and those
who use the
environment.”
“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
Resource costs are
defined as the costs of
foregone opportunities
which other uses suffer
due to the depletion of the
resource beyond its
[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
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 ... .
2.2
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.)
1.
[Insert text here. Use as much space as you need.]
2.
3.
4.
5.
2.3
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.)
[Insert text here. Use as much space as you need.]
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:
[Insert text here. Use as much space as you need.]
Thank you!
4
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.
Urgently needed
Tasks
Helpful
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)
Not needed
3.1
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
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?
1
[Insert text here. Use as much space as you need.]
2
3
Highly useful
Features
Could be helpful
Not useful
3.3 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 )
Comments (Use as much
space as you need)
Illustrative case studies
Information on data sources
References to academic discourse on
economic valuation
Basic information 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
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:
[Insert text here. Use as much space as you need.]
Part 4: Analysis Methods
This section addresses the methods of analysis and the type of economic information that
you intend to use for different decisions related to the implementation of the WFD.
4.1 What type of economic information 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 information used for
disproportionate costs decisions (Art. 4 WFD)
this type of
information
is not used
used, but
main
not
information
principal
type used
source of
information
Mainly qualitative information (verbal-descriptive)
Mainly non-monetary quantitative information (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 information 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 information used for recovery
of environmental and resource costs (Art. 9
WFD)
this type of
information
is not used
used, but
main
not
information
principal
type used
source of
information
Mainly qualitative information (verbal-descriptive)
Mainly non-monetary quantitative information
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
Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD
4.3 What type of economic information 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)
this type of
information
is not used
Type of economic information used for
assessing the cost-effectiveness of measures
(Art. 11 WFD)
used, but
main
not
information
principal
type used
source of
information
Mainly qualitative information (verbal-descriptive)
Mainly non-monetary quantitative information
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.
essential
Stage of decision making
relevant
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)
little relevance
5.1
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
Questionnaire: National Approaches to Assessing Environmental and Resource Costs according to the WFD
agree
Statement
“Economic valuation methods . . .
Neutral
Which statement best fits your views regarding the use of economic valuation?
(Please tick the appropriate boxes, feel free to add comments and clarifications)
Disagree
5.2
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
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
Benefit transfer
Cost
Cost recovery
Cost-effectiveness
DG Eco 2
Disproportionate
costs
Environmental and
resource costs and
benefits (ERCB)
Monetary valuation
Original valuation
study
Prioritisation
Screening
Standard values
Valuation method
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.
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.
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.
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 2009.
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.
European Drafting Group established in 2004 in the Common Implementation
Strategy (CIS) to produce a definition of environmental and resource costs
According to Article 4 WFD, the environmental objectives of the Directive can
be relaxed (by allowing more time or lowering environmental quality targets) if
the achievement of these objectives would be disproportionately expensive.
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