Cited by 555Environmental and Sediment ControlEnvironmental law and policyIntegrated Water Resources Management

The EU Water Framework Directive: from great expectations to problems with implementation

Open access
Voulvoulis, Nikolaos, Arpon, Karl Dominic, Giakoumis, Theodoros·2017·Science of The Total Environment

Abstract

The Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC (WFD) is widely accepted as the most substantial and ambitious piece of European environmental legislation to date. It has been referred to as a once in a generation opportunity to restore Europe's waters and a potential template for future environmental regulations. However, fifteen years since it was adopted, and with many problems and delays in its implementation, the WFD has not delivered its main objectives of non-deterioration of water status and the achievement of good status for all EU waters. Putting aside the daunting technical and organisational challenges of its implementation, this paper aims to shed light on why the great expectations that came with the WFD have not yet been fully realised. It reviews how the Directive has been interpreted, focusing on its intentions and how they were applied. The findings reveal the absence of the paradigm shift towards the systems (integrated) thinking that the WFD was grounded on, as a fundamental problem with its implementation. This is also evident in cases where the Directive has been criticised as a policy tool or when implementation efforts were reviewed, indicating misunderstandings even of its core principles. This inherent departure from the Directive's systemic intention and methodological approach needs further investigation, as it could be the reason behind many of its problems and delays. Unless current implementation efforts are reviewed or revised in light of this, enabling the paradigm shift required to ensure a more sustainable and holistic approach to water management, the fading aspirations of the initial great expectations that came with the Directive could disappear for good.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.228

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Voulvoulis, N., Arpon, K. D., & Giakoumis, T.
Affiliations
Imperial College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Voulvoulis, Nikolaos
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-01
Volume
575
Pages
358-366
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2529869467
Cited by
555
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 72 · 2020: 83 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 54 · 2017: 17
FWCI
119.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Science of The Total Environment (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) (Brunel University London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
European Communities 7th Framework Programme Funding (603629-ENV-2013-6.2.1-Globaqua)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental and Sediment Control
  • Social Sciences › Law › Environmental law and policy
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Integrated Water Resources Management
Keywords
Water Framework Directive, EU water policy, policy implementation, integrated water resources management, systems thinking, water status, good water status, environmental law, water governance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review