Philippe QUEVAUVILLER European Commission DG Research Directorate I ‘Environment’

1. Science-Policy interactions in the water sector – Some reflections on the role of science academies Philippe QUEVAUVILLER European Commission DG Research Directorate I ‘Environment’

2. D societal system D R P P I Understanding the system: Needs for multi-disciplinary and sectoral undertakings River Basin Management bio-physical system P S S S S Base sketch from Meade (1996) and DPSIR from EEA

3. Looking at different sectors – Integrated knowledge and policy implications?

4. Understanding the system= integrated knowledge (mixing natural, social, economic sciences) Source: EEA

5. WFD Adopted on 20.12.2000 + Parent legislation (e.g. Flood Directive) But also….. Linking knowledge to policy implementation – Anticipating & Feeding with research outputs linked to well defined Poliy milestones River basin districts Delineation water bodies 2005 Analysis of pressures and impacts 2005 Classification of bodies ‘at risk’ Design of monitoring Programmes 2006 Account of classification: • Surveillance monitoring • Operational monitoring (+ investigative monitoring) 6 years cycle / Review RBMP – 2009/2015 GOOD STATUS OBJECTIVE Programmes of Measures 2012

6. R&D responding to driver’s needs, yes, but should we not put some order in the house to avoid missing opportunities? FP6/7 IPs FP6/7 ERA-Nets LIFE Interreg COST Research Demonstration & testing Trans-boundary implementation Co-operation & networking Co-operation and co-ordination of research Evaluation of mitigation options AQUATERRA RISKBASE Water4All WAGRICO IWRM-Net SNOWMAN Courtesy Bob Harris, Sheffield University

7. Establishing links with ‘science-users’ POLICY DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH, SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS, POLICY INTEGRATION DESIGN OF POLICY POLICY IMPLEMENTATION POLICY REVIEW

8. Example of established platform: Common Implementation Strategy 2010-2012 Water Directors Steering of implementation process Chair: Presidency, Co-chair: Commission Strategic Co-ordination Group Co-ordination of work programme Chair: Commission Art. 21 Committee WG A“Ecological Status” Chair: JRC, DE, UK WG D“Reporting” Chair: EC, EEA, FR WG F“Floods” Chair: EC, IE ClimateChange & WFD Chair: DE, EC WFD andAgriculture Chair: FR, UK WG C“Groundwater” Chair: EC, AT WG E“Chemical Aspects” Chair: EC, JRC, IT, FR, SE Water scarcityand drought Chair: IT, FR, ES Established working groups Temporary working groups Stakeholders, NGO’s, Researchers, Experts, etc.

9. Communication involves two ways exchanges of information who - is your audience or the users of the information? what - do they need to know? how - is it best presented? when - do they need the information? Can Science Academies help in the „transforming“ work? Courtesy of Peter Allen-Williams (IWRM.Net) & Bob Harris

10. Research EU- or NATIONAL PROJECTS International / National / Regional Policy and Research Dissemination Communication Uptake Implementation Research resultsFour stages to implementation A role for Science Academies? Courtesy of Peter Allen-Williams (IWRM.Net) & Bob Harris

11. Linking initiatives on relevant themes EU-Funded research RTD synergies, Critical mass? Links with EU, National, regional stakeholders? Joint dissemination strategies, communication efforts (single voice)?

12. Linking specific case studies at relevant scales Case studies Project data: EEA, WISE? Links with regional projects, incl. INTERREG? Links with River Basin Authorities, local science providers, others?

13. Transfer and use of research: where to start, top-down or bottom-up? High Authorities Coordinating Groups, Incl. Academies? Policy question & purpose Scientific / Technical Recommendations Policy Implementation Working Groups ‘Users’ of Science information (RBD level, local)  Implementation

14. 1st level of communication through “Science-Policy Briefs” • Science-Policy Briefs should have a ‘cascade’ effect, starting from policy questions to which science contributes to bring responses (decision-makers), and providing technical/scientific recommendations with increased level of details (implementers) • Briefs are an incentive to consider potentially interesting research outputs but they do not ensure themselves an appropriate transfer: needs for downscaling ‘relays’ and demonstration at river basin levels • Usability conditioned by proper communication (guides?) and language barriers

15. Example of Science-Policy Briefs The XEROCHORE project (drought research) has produced 5 Science Policy Briefs on the link between drought and the EU Water Framework Directive, i.e.: - characterisation of water bodies and of the analysis of pressures and impacts (Art. 5) - monitoring of surface water and groundwater status and of protected areas (Art. 8 - relevant also for Art. 1) - recovery of costs for water services (Art. 9) - implementing a programme of measures (Art. 11, including Annex VI part b) - river basin management plans (Art.13)

16. 2nd level of communication through “technical guides” Accessible science information, from state-of-the-art review up to “cooking recipes” describing how to apply specific research outputs

17. Effective communication / use at catchment level! Sustainable land use practices ! Image from presentation by Dr Peter Heiland used.

18. Interfacing needs Expertise, tools Research recommendations Linked to policies (short to long-term goals) Scientific knowledge INTERFACE Data infrastructure “memory” Transfer & dissem. “usability” POLICY-MAKERS Member States Commission Demonstration, practical works at most appropriate level / scale Interactive interface

19. Seen from a different angle Research USERS IDENTIFICATION OF RESEARCH NEEDS DEVELOPMENT DATA ACCESS EU-wide National Data from projects Policy Expert Groups Webportal Results (info / data) directly usable/ transferable? YES NO INFORMATION ACCESS INFORMATION EXCHANGES • Demonstration (applicability) • Capacity-building • Networking TRAINING Education, Training A POSSIBLE OPERATIONAL SCIENCE-POLICY INTERFACE IN SUPPORT OF INTEGRATED RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT

20. Conclusions – Role of Science Academies? • ‘integrated knowledge’ is a must to effectively support policies – this requires multi-disciplinary and sectoral cooperation. Science Academies may have a liaison role in this respect • An operational science-policy interfacing is essential to ensure proper synergies and take-up of scientific results by “users”. Possibilities for Science Academies to contribute to relays of scientific information/outputs? • Specific research needs have to be identified in which Science Academies have obviously a role to play • Last but not least, the strong “knowledge anchorage” of Science Academies should be better used and known by policy-makers and stakeholders