Water Management Common List of Indicators & Database · Introduction . The present report ... This indicator expresses the mean level variation of the ground water per drilling or

WATERinCORE Water Management Analysis MED Programme 2007-2013 Phase 3.3

1

Project cofinanced by European Regional Development Fund

Project cofinancé par le Fonds européen de développement régional

1G-MED08-515

“Sustainable Water Management through

Common Responsibility enhancement in

Mediterranean River Basins‖

August 2010

Water Management

Common List of Indicators & Database


2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Indroduction

2. List of Water Management indicators

3. Common Database Template per Indicator

4. Annex: Guideline for developing an indicators system for monitoring

sustainability of water management


3

1. Introduction

The present report was drafted in the framework of the 1G-MED08-515

WATERinCORE project for the ―Sustainable Water Management through Common

Responsibility enhancement in Mediterranean River Basins‖.

The WATERinCORE project is implemented under the transnational programme of

European territorial cooperation MED (http://www.programmemed.eu), Priority Axe

2: Environmental protection and promotion of a sustainable territorial development,

Objective 2.1: Protection and enhancement of natural resources and cultural

heritage.

The project is focusing on the protection of water resources through the sustainable

management and common responsibility enhancement. Its objective is the

exploitation of the experience and the disparity of the participants’ regional

institutions in WM issues and the Public Participation (PP) in Med Level, in order to

produce methodological tools for PP in WM for the entire Mediterranean River Basin.

Within the framework of the 3rd component of the project ―Water Management in the

participants’ regions-Pilot River basin‖, a methodological framework for the definition

of WM indicators for the monitoring of sustainable water management, based on the

results of WM Analysis, was set and applied (phase 3.3). Thus, a common list of WM

indicators was formed. Each indicator will be analytically described by each partner

for the pilot river basin districts, based on the Common Database Template

proposed. The Water Management List of indices will be used for the creation of the

common database on water management (phase 3.4). The evaluation of the data for

the indicators and the implementation of a SWOT analysis per pilot basin will finally

develop a Strategic Water Management Plan for each pilot basin of the participant

regions (phase 3.4).

The annex describes the guidelines for developing an indicators system for

monitoring sustainability of water management. Its purpose is to provide criteria for

selection of indicators and homogeneous operative standards for filling indicator

common database templates in order to support monitoring and assessment of

sustainability of water management.

http://www.programmemed.eu/

WATERinCORE Water Management Analysis

MED Programme 2007-2013 Phase 3.3 4

2. List of Water Management indicators

Country: Region: Name of Pilot River Basin: Total Area of Pilot River Basin: Total Population of Pilot River Basin:

Indicator Type Sustainability Dimension

Purpose Description Unit of Measurement

DPSIR Classification

1. Land use a. Water bodies

b. Rangeland c. Forests

d. Urban area e. Industrial area

f. Agricultural area

Descriptive Environmental Providing information about land coverage and use

This indicator expresses the articulation of territory based on the category of use (water bodies, forests,

agricultural, industrial, urban areas and grazing land) through data on extension, given in hectares and

percentage, of land area of each category of use. It should be elaborated with GIS instruments starting from

studies on land use or the Corine Land Cover maps, with

cartographic restitution of elaboration.

Hectares (ha), percentage (%)

State

2. Population Density Descriptive Social Providing information about the concentration

of the human population in reference to space.

It can be used as a partial indicator of human requirements and activities in an area.

Population density is the number of people per unit of

area usually per square kilometer or mile. It can be

calculated from population of the area divided by the surface it covers.

Number of population per

Square meters of area

(per m2)

Driving Force

3. Plant communities zones

Descriptive Environmental Providing information about the plant species groups that are growing in the zone. Plant

community zones affect the surface runoff and

give information whether an irrigation area or a settlement is prone to flood risks. Moreover

is a indirect indicator which gives information about climate conditions and the relief

This indicator expresses the type of climate that is suitable for a specific group of plant species. Describe

the exact community zone that belongs each pilot river

basin.

Dimensionless State

4. Elevation Descriptive Environmental The elevation of a specific area informs about

the complete morphological view

This indicator expresses the peaks and dipr of the relief

on the Z-axis given in meters, from mean sea level (0m).

Meters (m) State

5. Slope Descriptive Environmental Slope is one of the natural factors, decides soil

characteristics, plant and animals, controlling the proportion of precipitation that is

converted to runoff in a given landscape, and the time it takes for runoff to enter a stream.

Ratio of the altitude change to the horizontal distance

between any two points on the line

(%) percentage State

6. Total Water Balance Performance Environmental-

Developmental

The knowledge of the water balance is crucial

parameter which is able to lead to the integrated exploitation of water resources and

to detect water deficit or surplus.

The total water balance is expressed as:

Changes in stock=Inputs-Outputs (over a specific period of time)

The water Inputs are the sum of the precipitation that

infiltrates and enriches the aquifer, the reused wastewater and the inputs of neighboring basins. The

water Outputs are the sum of the consumption for irrigation, water supply, industrial and livestock

consumption and the outputs to the neighboring basins.

m3/year deficit of surplus State

7. Water table variation rate

Performance Environmental Provides information about the availability of ground waters

This indicator expresses the mean level variation of the ground water per drilling or the general mean level

variation, given in meters or in percentage.

Meters (m) or Percentage variation pre year (%)

State

8. Mean annual precipitation

Descriptive Environmental Providing information about the amount of water as input to the hydraulic cycle.

This indicator expresses the mean amount of precipitation given in millimeters in a year.

Millimeters (mm)

State

9. Runoff coefficient Performance Environmental RC is a parameter to evaluate the moisture

recycling and the importance of land use practices in rainfall recycling

This indicator expresses the amount of water that runs

off to the total amount of precipitation that the catchment has as input, given in percentage.

Percentage (%)

State

10. Total Annual Water

Consumption

Performance Environmental-

Developmental

Providing information the water consumed

from ground and surface water per sector

Total annual water use per sector (water supply,

irrigation, industry, livestock).

Percentage of the total

consumption for each

Pressure

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilometer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mile



(water supply, irrigation, industry, livestock). sector

11. Water Exploitation

Index (WEI)


Developmental

Providing information whether the rate of

abstractions in countries are sustainable over the long term.

WEI is defined as the mean annual total abstraction of

fresh water divided by the long-term average freshwater resources. It describes how the total water abstraction

puts pressure on water resources. Thus it identifies

those countries having high abstraction in relation to their resources and therefore are prone to suffer

problems of water stress. The long-term average freshwater resource is derived from the long-term

average precipitation minus the long-term average

evapotranspiration plus the long-term average inflow from neighbouring countries. The warning threshold for

the water exploitation index which distinguishes a non-stressed from a stressed region is around 20 % (Raskin

et al. 1997). Severe water stress can occur where the

WEI exceeds 40%, indicating strong competition for water but not necessarily enough extraction to trigger

frequent water crises.

Water exploitation index -

WEI (%)

Pressure

12. Water Discharge Descriptive Environmental A forecasting and management tool of risk

events caused by floods in a specific repeat

period.

This indicator expresses the maximum discharge that

the hydrographic network of the catchment can

produce, given in m3/sec.(proposed 50 years period of time)

Cubic meters per second

(m3/sec)

Impact

13. Sediment discharge Descriptive Environmental PD expresses the aggravation rate of water

discharge, with sediments and the bed and banks exposure rate to desertification.

Increase of sediment discharge Increases the possibility of floods.

This indicator expresses the amount of sediments that is

eroded from the banks and bed of the river from the maximum water discharge given in m3/sec.

Cubic meters per second

(m3/sec)

Impact

14. Produced urban

wastewaters

Performance Environmental Urban Wastewaters a significant point source Amount of Waste water from residential settlements and

services which originates predominantly from the human metabolism and from household activities and run-off

rain water

Cubic meters (m3/sec)

Impact

15. Produced industrial wastewaters

Performance Environmental Industrial Wastewaters a significant point source

Any waste water which is discharged from premises used for carrying on any trade or industry, including

pasturalism, other than domestic waste water and run-off rain water.

Cubic meters (m3/sec)

Impact

16. % Population served by

W.W.T.P.


Social-Developmental

The level of treatment before discharge and

the sensitivity of the receiving waters determine the scale of impacts on aquatic

ecosystems.

In compliance with the Directive 91/271/EC, that has

been incorporate with the JMD 5673/400/1997 in the Greek aquis, the Greek populated areas have been

divided in three priorities (A,B,C): Priority area A: Settlements with equivalent population

(e.p.) over 10.000 that discharge their wastewater to

―sensitive‖ water bodies must complete the installation of sewage central collection and treatment systems until

31/12/1998. Priority area B: Settlements with e.p. over 15.000 that

discharge their wastewater to ―normal‖ water bodies

must complete the installation of sewage central collection and treatment systems until 31/12/2000.

Priority area C: Settlements with e.p. over 2.000 that are not included in the priority area A &B must complete the

installation of sewage central collection and treatment systems until 31/12/2005. In this priority it is also

included settlements in which sewage central collection

system has already been installed. Taking into consideration the above classification it can

be identified the percentage of population connected with WWTP.

Percentage of the

population served by WWTP

State

17. Industries with Treated

Wastewater

Performance Environmental Gives information whether the industrial

activity comprises significant point source

Percentage of the amount of wastewater of industries

located at the River basin, treated by using their own

Percentage (%) of

industrial wastewater

Driving Force-Impact



pollution for surface and ground waters in the specific region.

plants or by transferring then to other Wastewater Treatment Plants.

treated

18. Reused wastewater Performance Environmental Treated wastewater is becoming increasingly

an important alternative water resource.

Moreover wastewater effluence is a water source that covers the quality standards and

its use reduces the natural water consumption.

Treated wastewater could be precious water recourse

for the following purposes:

Urban reuse—the irrigation of public parks, school yards, highway medians, and residential landscapes, as well as

for fire protection and toilet flushing in commercial and industrial buildings.

Agricultural reuse—irrigation of nonfood crops, such as

fodder and fiber, commercial nurseries, and pasture lands. High-quality reclaimed water is used to irrigate

food crops. Environmental reuse—creating artificial wetlands,

enhancing natural wetlands, and sustaining stream

flows. Industrial reuse—process or makeup water and cooling

tower water.

Percentage of waste

water reused

Response

19. Population served by

water supply network


Social-

Developmental

Information whether the potables needs of the

population is covered by water networks

The number of population that is served by water supply

network within the limits of the particular area

Percentage of population

served

State

20. Irrigation Area served

by irrigation network


Developmental

Providing information about the integrated

management of water resources for irrigation

purposes

The surface of irrigated area served by irrigation

network

Percentage of irrigated

area served by irrigation networks

State

21. Ecological status of

surface waters


Developmental

UNDER DISCUSSION ****The ecological status, as an indicator for monitoring sustainable water management, is difficult to assess because of the large number of measurements that need to be implemented and the complexity to describe it, because is related with a large number of sub-indicators.

For surface water categories, the ecological status

classification for the water body shall be represented by the lower of the values for the biological and physico-

chemical monitoring results for the relevant quality

elements classified in High, Good, Moderate, Poor and Bad, according WFD.

State

22. Chemical Status of surface waters

Performance Environmental-Developmental

UNDER DISCUSSION ****The chemical status, as an indicator for monitoring sustainable water management, is difficult to assess because of the large number of measurements that need to be implemented, and the complexity to describe it, because is related with a large number of sub-indicators.

Where a waterbody achieves compliance with all the environmental quality standards established in Annex

IX, Article 16 of WFD and under other relevant Community legislation setting environmental quality

standards it shall be recorded as achieving good

chemical status. If not, the body shall be recorded as failing to achieve good chemical status, according

WFD.

State

23. Quantity of ground

waters


Developmental

Providing information whether the availability

of groundwater resources is not exceeded by

the long-term annual average abstraction rate.

The parameter for the classification of quantitative

status is Groundwater level regime.

State

24. Chemical Status of

ground waters


Developmental

UNDER DISCUSSION ****Providing information about the appropriateness for different kind of water uses.

The parameters for the classification of chemical status

are Conductivity and Concentrations of pollutants

State

25. Bathing Water Quality Performance Environmental Providing information about the coastal water quality assessing the presence or absence of

pollution sources.

The indicator describes the changes over time in the quality of designated bathing waters (inland and marine)

in EU Member States in terms of compliance with

standards for microbiological parameters (total coliforms and faecal coliforms) and physicochemical parameters

(mineral oils, surface-active substances and phenols) introduced by the EU Bathing Water Directive

(76/160/EEC).

Percentage of inland and marine water bathing

waters complying with

the mandatory standards and guide levels for

microbiological and physicochemical

parameters.

State

26. Water tariffs Performance Social-

Developmental-Economical

Providing information about the integrated

pricing policy adapted per water use.

A water tariff is a price assigned to water supplied by a

public enterprise to its customers per use. Currency/m3 per use Response

27. Cost Recovery Performance Environmental- Providing information about the cost recovery Article 9.1 of the Directive refers to the total cost of Cost recovery rate per Response

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_utility



Developmental-Social-Economical

of municipality water services (water supply, sewerage and irrigation)

water services requires detailed assessment of all components of total cost including:

The financial cost which refers to investment costs, operating and maintenance works,

management and administrative costs and other

direct economic costs. The cost of natural resources represents the

benefit loss due to limitation of available water resources to a greater extent than natural the

refresh rate. The environmental costs represent the cost of the

impact caused by the use of water environment and

aquatic ecosystems.

Municipality and service-Percentage (%)

28. Water Management

Authorities

Descriptive Environmental-

Developmental-

Social-Economical

Providing Information whether there is a local

authority which is responsible for the

integrated management of the Pilot River Basin.

Water management authorities that are responsible for

the implementation of the WFD and the achievement of

its Objectives.

Number Response

29. Water bodies’ Naturalness

Descriptive Environmental Providing information about the water bodies have been altered by human activities

The indicator describes the morphological state of water body. Indicate the percentage of the total length of

rivers or the surface of lakes that fall into the following

classes: Natural

Heavily (or strong) modified Artificial

Percentage (%) State

8

3. Common Database template per Indicator

TYPE Distinguish the different roles they can play in decision-making processes (EEA, 2003). 1) Descriptive indicators: used to characterize environmental situation; 2) Performance indicators: used to measure achievement degree of established

targets (they may use the same variables as descriptive indicators, but are connected with target values);

3) Efficiency indicators: used to measure efficiency degree of products and processes;

4) Policy-effectiveness indicators: used to relate detected environmental changes with political efforts;

5) Total welfare indicators; indicators of overall sustainability. Particularly interesting for the purposes of Waterincore project, appear to be the first two types of indicators, since they can be used respectively to characterize in detail water management in chosen pilot basin (phase 3.4), and to measure the achievement degree of targets established in the Water Action Plan (phase 5.4).

SUSTAINABILITY DIMENSION Specify if it is Environmental, Social, Institutional or Economical PURPOSE Specify indicator’s priority aims DESCRIPTION Describes indicator in details: definition and based concepts. Methodological description and kind of data needed to compile the indicator UNIT OF MEASUREMENT Gives indicator unit of measurement (tons, meters, mg/lit, etc.) DPSIR CLASSIFICATION Specify if it is a driving force, pressure, Impact, State, Response indicator. DATA PROCESSING SCALE

● Spatial scale: specify if spatial coverage is provincial, municipal, etc. ● Timing scale:

○ Temporal coverage: time range of data availability ○ Updating frequency: frequency at which indicator is or can be updated.

DATA SOURCE Indicates data holder from whom they can be obtained.

INDICATOR

Indicator name

9

TABLES and PICTURES They can give indicators value. Here it could also be point out comments and remarks, if any, about indicators values presented at the tables and pictures. STATUS and TREND Table – Scheme to assign Chernoff icon to indicators on the basis of their state and trend

State or trend is very favorable and/or is approaching to established target value

State or trend is stationary and/or shows a steady trend to established target value

State or trend is unfavourable and/or is departing from established target value

Indicator evaluation should be done by assessing the indicator’s status and temporal trend comparing with target or reference value (from benchmarking, provincial/municipal means, laws values). The selection of a "specific" Chernoff icon will therefore be based on improving or worsening indicator trend comparing with the adopted target or reference value.

10

ANNEX



GUIDELINE FOR DEVELOPING AN INDICATORS SYSTEM

FOR MONITORING SUSTAINABILITY OF WATER

MANAGEMENT

Phase 3.3 – Water management lists and database

Ing. Antonino Granata

Dott.ssa Virginia Palumbo

Dott.ssa Paola Aiello

1G–MED08-515

MED Programme 2007-2013



Contents

1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 2 2 Indicators: characteristics, functions and application fields .................................................. 2 3 Monitoring sustainability of water resources management by using indicators ....................... 4

3.1 Principles of general sustainability .............................................................................. 5 3.2 Specific sustainability aims related to water resources theme ....................................... 5

4 Typology of indicators to use for monitoring sustainability of water resources management ... 6 5 Essential references ......................................................................................................... 9 6 Attachments ................................................................................................................. 10

6.1 Attachment 1 - Data sheet model for core-set indicator and sub-areas indicators ....... 10 6.2 Attachment 2 - Data sheet model for context indicator ........................................... 11



Introduction

This paper is a proposal of guideline for developing an indicators system for monitoring sustainability of water management, in order to carry out phase 3.3 of Waterincore project.

Its purpose is to provide criteria for selection of indicators and homogeneous operative standards for filling indicator sheets in order to support monitoring and assessment of sustainability of water management. The document, after introducing basic concepts on indicators and their characteristics, functions and application fields, focuses on sustainability indicators and their use for monitoring sustainablility of water management, by identifying general criteria for selection of indicators, standards for filling of their sheets and by also providing a proposal of methodological procedure for individuation of indicators system to be adopted.

Indicators: characteristics, functions and application fields

―An indicator is an observed value representative of a phenomenon of study. In general, indicators quantify information by aggregating different and multiple data. The resulting information is therefore synthesised. In short, indicators simplify information that can help to reveal complex phenomena. They focus on certain aspects which are regarded relevant and on which data are available. But their significance goes beyond that obtained directly from the observed properties‖ (EEA, 1999, 2003). Main function of indicators is communication: they in fact, by quantifying phenomena and simplifying complex realities, should be able to provide key information to support decision-making and promote public awareness regarding the issues they relate with.

Using indicators to support policies development is well established in Europe and all over the world. For instance environmental indicators are used for these main purposes:

• to supply information on environmental issues, in order to enable policy-makers to value their seriousness, to identify key factors that cause pressures on the environment and to support policies development and priority setting;

• to monitor the effects of policy responses aimed to solve environmental detected issues;

• to raise public awareness on environmental issues in order to strengthen public support to policy measures.

A key role is also played by indicators in environmental assessment processes, particularly those of plans and programmes, namely in strategic environmental assessment processes under Directive 42/2001/CE, in which the use of indicators is planned in several phases of assessment process for the following main purposes:

• to analyze territorial and environmental characteristics of area potentially affected by effects of the plan/program;

• to monitor temporal evolution of area’s environmental characteristics and trend of effects of the plan/program;

• to periodically measure achievement degree of targets established in the plan/program.



As to concerned to the use of indicators to communicate information, useful both to political decision-making and environmental assessment processes, it is to point out some key features that indicators should have in order to effectively perform their function. These features are listed below in order to provide general guidance criteria for the selection of indicators as is specified in paragraph 4:

• Relevance: relation of the indicator with the topics and the aims;

• Analytical consistency: the indicator must be qualified and well founded in technical and scientific point of view;

• Communicability: immediate comprehensibility for both technicians and common people;

• Sensitivity to plan’s actions: capability to detect changes induced by implementation of the plan;

• Short response time: indicator must detect in a short time changes induced from the implementation of the plan;

• Based on data:

quickly available, or made available through a reasonable use of resource,

of known quality and reliability,

regularly updated.

Referential analytical framework adopted by European Environmental Agency (EEA) in order to evaluate relationship between human activities and environment is the DPSIR model (Drivers – Pressures – State – Impact - Responses). According to this model, human activities drivers exert pressures on the environment and, as a consequence, the state of the environment changes: this leads to impacts (i.e. on human healt, ecosystems and materials) that may elicit responses aimed to change drivers, pressures or directly state or impacts, through adaptation or improvement actions (Fig.1).

Figure 1 – The DPSIR Framework (EEA, 1999)

This model describes a dynamic situation, as the real one, through the use of indicators (of Drivers – Pressures – State – Impact - Responses), which are ―snapshots‖ of a non-stop evolving system, useful not only to describe each components of the model, but also to highlight the dynamic relationships among them.



Most of indicators sets used internationally to analyze the relationships between human activities and the environment is based on this model. These sets are used to characterize principal environmental issues (eg. air pollution, waste, water, etc ...) in relation to geographical scope of the analysis.

So we think it’s advisable to relate to DIPSIR model proposed by EEA also in Waterincore project – phase 3.3, as regards selection and classification of sustainability indicators for water management (see paragraph 4).

Finally, it is worth dwelling on indicators classification adopted by EEA to distinguish the different roles they can play in decision-making processes (EEA, 2003). Indicators can be classified into 5 different typologies:

6) Descriptive indicators: used to characterize environmental situation;

7) Performance indicators: used to measure achievement degree of established targets (they may use the same variables as descriptive indicators, but are connected with target values);

8) Efficiency indicators: used to measure efficiency degree of products and processes;

9) Policy-effectiveness indicators: used to relate detected environmental changes with political efforts;

10) Total welfare indicators; indicators of overall sustainability.

Particularly interesting for the purposes of Waterincore project, appear to be the first two types of indicators, since they can be used respectively to characterize in detail water management in chosen pilot basin (phase 3.4), and to measure the achievement degree of targets established in the Water Action Plan (phase 5.4).

Monitoring sustainability of water resources management by using indicators

The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, established, subscribing Agenda 21, that environmental aims must be considered together with social, economic and institutional ones, by pursuing social equity in distribution and access to environmental resources and human rights such as work, health, social care, access to basic services and house. This, it was said in that conference, has to be achieved by protecting right of people of third world and of future generations to enjoy the same rights.

At Rio Conference was also stated that ―Indicators of sustainable development need to be developed in order to provide solid bases to decision-making processes at all levels and to trigger a mechanism of autoregulation of environment and development integrated systems1‖.

Using sustainability indicators as a tool to support sustainable development policies is by now widespread internationally, nationally and locally. They in effect represent an useful tool even in Local Agenda 21 processes, where they allow not only to produce a "diagnostic picture‖, but also to monitor and verify the achievement of targets that Agenda 21 intends to pursue through implementation of Action Plan.

In order to define an adequate system of sustainability indicators to be used in Local Agenda 21 processes applied to water management, it is necessary to begin from general

1 Agenda 21, Rio de Janeiro 1992, chapter 40.



sustainability principles and specific sustainability aims established for water resources and for geographic scopes of analysis. Coherence with identified principles and aims, in fact, can provide an useful guidance for indicators assessment and selection.

Principles of general sustainability

A detailed survey of general sustainability principles can be based on policy papers drawn up at European, national and regional levels. Among European references, Sustainability principles adopted under ECI Project (2003), Aalborg Commitments (2004), European Strategy for Sustainable Development (2006) and Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Employment of Lisbon Strategy (2000) are worth remembering. In Waterincore project, however, a survey of those most applicable in Local Agenda 21 processes has been carried out (see internal document "Local Agenda 21 - Achievement Recognition Matrix"). These principles are:

1. Integration: the effective integration of environmental, social and economic considerations in decision making;

2. Community involvement: recognition that sustainability cannot be achieved, nor significant progress made toward it, without the support and involvement of the whole community;

3. Precautionary behaviour: where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation;

4. Equity within and between generations: fairness and equal access to opportunities both in our lifetimes, as well as future generations;

5. Continual improvement: the declining environmental situation means there is an imperative to take immediate action to become more sustainable and to make continual improvement;

6. Ecological integrity: to protect biological diversity and maintain essential ecological processes and life support systems.

Specific sustainability aims related to water resources theme

A survey of specific sustainability aims related to water resources theme should be based on following references:

a) regulatory requirements and guidance provided by european, national and regional policy documents already identified during the survey referred to in paragraph 3.1;

b) examples of good practices come out from geographic benchmarking processes among areas with similar features and/or issues;

c) environmental, social and economic aims identified for each sectors of Water Management Analysis (Phase 3.1) and related to river basins of each region taking part in the project, during the filling of Survey Document, section AIMS - RESPONSES

In relation to point c), a scheme of matrix is proposed in Table 1, that can be used to synthesize specific sustainability aims identified for each sector of the WM Analysis within the river basins of regions involved in the project, and reported in the Survey Document.



Table 1 – Scheme di matrix Sustainability aims – Sector of WM Analysis

Sector of WM Analysis (Survey Document) Aims

environmental social economical

11 - Lakes and rivers

12 - Groundwater

13 - Seawater

14 - Ecosystems and special protected areas

15 - Thermal and mineral waters

16 - Drainage, rain water management

17 - Irrigation, water for agricultural use

18 - Derivations’water for energy and industrial use

19 - Aquaculture - fish and plant farming - fishing

20 - Water quality control

21 - Water balance analysis, meteo data

22 - Surveillance and controls’policy

23 - Drillings, permit and control

24 - Water infrastructures

25 - Sewage infrastructures

Typology of indicators to use for monitoring sustainability of water resources management

The list of specific sustainability aims in water resources theme resulting from the survey

referred to in paragraph 3.2, together with the general principles of sustainability stated in paragraph 3.1, can be used as a "selection grid" of descriptive and performance indicators, as described in paragraph 2, to monitor and assess the sustainability of water management at basin scale. The first kind of indicators, in fact, may be used to characterize in detail the water management of pilot basin (phase 3.4 of Waterincore project), the second kind (which may use the same variables as descriptive indicators, but are connected with target values) can be used to monitor and assess the achievement degree of sustainability aims identified for water resources theme and could become targets of Water Action Plan for that pilot basin (phase 5.4).

The indicators should be selected to adequately represent the categories of DPSIR model applied to water theme. In this regard it may be useful to refer to the scheme developed by EEA (2003), shown in Fig. 2, where the main types of Determinants, Pressures, State, Impacts and Responses, related to Water theme, have been identified.



Figure 2 – Scheme of DPSIR model applied to water theme (EEA, 2003)

Another important aspect to keep in mind is the territorial scope of analysis to which

selection of indicators refers, according to DPSIR model. In this respect, it seems to be useful, for purposes of the project, to consider two distinct levels of analysis:

1) An analysis at pilot river basin level, which constitutes the main territorial scope for the detailed analysis of water management scheduled in phase 3.4;

2) An analysis at sub-areas level (identified within the pilot river basin on the basis of homogeneous environmental, territorial and/or socio-economic characteristics), which, borrowing a classification successfully applied in some experiences of monitoring and assessment of local sustainability (Municipality of Florence, 2008), are believed to be represented at least in the first instance by the following main types:

a. coastal area and islands; b. mountain area; c. rural and hilly area; d. urban area; e. tourism area; f. agricultural area; g. industrial area.

The identification of sub-areas with homogeneous environmental territorial and/or socio-economic characteristics, aims to guide the selection of indicators not only to those which analyze sustainability issues at basin level, but also on those which analyze local issues and territorial specificities within it, which may stimulate interest and involvement of local stakeholders in ―Social Dialogue‖ on water management, scheduled in phase 5.2 of project.



According to these different levels of analysis, it’s therefore possible to identify a corresponding articulation of indicators system in three separate classes: core-set indicators (related to pilot river basin), context indicators and sub-areas indicators (related to territorial sub-areas mentioned above), as shown in table 3, where also the description of classes is reported together with the reference to Indicator Data Sheet Model to be filled in, attached to this document.

In general, except for context indicators which aim to provide a general overview and to facilitate the association of a territory to one or more types of sub-areas for the subsequent in-depth analysis, the selected indicators will be used both to characterize water management in the pilot river basin, and to monitor and assess its sustainability. The core-set and sub-areas indicators, in fact, will be used not only as descriptive but also as performance indicators, through the assessment of state and time trends observed in the indicators in absolute and in relation to the target value adopted.

The target value would consist of normative values, average provincial/municipal values or values achieved by the same indicator in similar realities (benchmarking). Indicator trend towards improvement/deterioration and its trend towards approaching to/departing from the adopted target value will be represented by means of the "specific" Chernoff icon (Table 2), which provides an evaluation of reaching target. After processing and evaluating each indicator, an integrated assessment of all observed dynamics will be carried out, in order to assess sustainability of water management as a whole within the pilot river basin.

Table 2 – Scheme to assign Chernoff icon to indicators on basis of their state and trend

State or trend is very favorable and/or is approaching to established target value State or trend is stationary and/or shows a steady trend to established target value State or trend is unfavourable and/or is departing from established target value

Table 3 – Scheme of indicators system partition based on territorial field of analysis

Territorial scope of analysis

Indicators class Class description Reference to

Indicator Data Sheet Model

River basin Core-set indicators

They constitute the "heart" of the indicators system, related to water management issues and features of common interest to the whole river basin. They are classifiable according to sustainability dimension (environmental, socio-institutional, economic) to which they relate, and according to DPSIR model.

Attachment 6.1

Sub-areas

Context indicators It 'a set of indicators covering the three dimensions of sustainability that

Attachment 6.2



Essential references

Municipality of Florence, Linee Guida per un sistema regionale di indicatori comuni di sostenibilità locale, 2008

Gabrielsen P. and Bosch P., Environmental Indicators: Typology and Use in Reporting, European Environment Agency, 2003

Smeets E. and Weterings R., Environmental indicators: Typology and overview, European Environment Agency, 1999

AA.VV., Europe’s water: an indicator-based assessment, European Environment Agency, 2003

are functional to general overview of the territory as regards the geographical, environmental, social and economic aspects. Context indicators provide a general framework from which emerge local specificities and which facilitates the association of a territory to one or more types of sub-areas among the identified ones: coastal area and islands, mountain area, rural and hilly area; urban area, tourism area, agricultural area, industrial area. They are classifiable according to dimensions of sustainability (environmental, socio-institutional, economic) to which they relate, and according to DPSIR model.

Sub-areas indicators

These indicators aim to analyse issues and features of water management explicitly related to local specificities. These are indicators aimed to in-depth examination of environmental, social, economic and institutional peculiarities of each territory at local scale and they are classifiable according to dimensions of sustainability (environmental, socio-institutional, economic) to which they relate, and according to DPSIR model.

Attachment 6.1



Attachments

Attachment 1 - Data sheet model for core-set indicator and sub-areas indicators

Indicator data sheet contains detailed information about selected core-set indicator or sub-areas indicator. It consists of two parts: first is descriptive (metadata), the other is compilative (data) and in that it will be recorded different representations (graphs, tables, thematic maps) of available historical series.

The following section provides a structure example for the indicator data sheet:

INDICATOR INDICATOR NAME

SUSTAINABILITY DIMENSION Specify if Environmental, Social, Institutional, Economic PURPOSE Specify indicator priority aims. DESCRIPTION Describes indicator in details: definition and based concepts. Methodological description and kind of data needed to compile the indicator. UNIT OF MEASUREMENT Gives indicator unit of measurement in extenso (tons, meters, chilograms, etc.). DATA PROCESSING SCALE

- Spatial scale: specify if spatial coverage is provincial, municipal, etc. - Timing scale:

o Temporal coverage: time range of data availability o Updating frequency: frequency at which indicator can be updated

DATA SOURCE Indicates data holder who they can be obtained from. DPSIR CLASSIFICATION Specify if it is a Driving force, Pressure, State, Impact, Responce indicator REMARKS TABLES and PICTURES Points out comments and remarks, if any, about tables and pictures. STATUS and TREND Indicator valuation should be done by assessing the indicator status and temporal trend overall and correlated to guide or reference value (from benchmarking, provincial/municipal means, laws values). The assignment of "specific" Chernoff icon will therefore be based on improving or worsening indicator trend and approaching or outcoming from the guide or adopted reference value (describe reasons and correlations, if any, with measures adopted on the territory). Following indicator metadata sheet, data are reported as tables and pictures.



Attachment 2 - Data sheet model for context indicator

Indicator data sheet contains detailed information about selected context indicator.

It consists of two parts: first is descriptive (metadata), the other is compilative (data) in the latter they will be recorded changing number of representations (graphs, tables, thematic maps) of available historical series.

The following section provides a structure example for the indicator data sheet:

INDICATOR INDICATOR NAME

SUSTAINABILITY DIMENSION Specify if Environmental, Social, Institutional, Economic PURPOSE Specify indicator priority aims. DESCRIPTION Describes indicator in details: definition and based concepts, methodological description and kind of data needed to compile the indicator. UNIT OF MEASUREMENT Gives indicator unit of measurement in extenso (tons, meters, chilograms, etc.). DATA PROCESSING SCALE

- spatial scale: Specify if spatial coverage is provincial, municipal, etc. - timing scale:

o Temporal coverage: time range of data availability o Updating frequency: frequency in which indicator can be updated

DATA SOURCE Indicates data holder who they can be obtained from. DPSIR CLASSIFICATION Specify if it is a Driving force, Pressure, State, Impact, Responce indicator REMARKS TABLES and PICTURES Points out comments and remarks, if any, about tables and pictures. STATUS and TREND Describes indicator status and variation trend over the time. Following indicator metadata sheet, data are reported as tables and pictures.



EXAMPLE OF DRAWING UP OF DATA SHEET MODEL FOR SUB-AREAS INDICATOR

Attachment 1 – ARPA SiCILIA GuidELine (From ―ARPA Sicilia, Annuario regionale dei dati ambientali 2007, Palermo, 2008‖ with

modifications)

INDICATOR

SUITABILITY FOR BATHING SUSTAINABILITY DIMENSION Environmental PURPOSE The indicator ―suitability for bathing‖ indicates coastal water quality assessing the presence or absence of pollution sources, mainly due to urban sewage, and the efficiency of sewage treatment. DESCRIPTION It is estimated the percentage ratio of the length (misured in km) of coast asserted suitable for bathing on that effectively controlled. Further information can be deduced from the relationship "no bathing coast / total coast" for its significance as potential impact (human activity on the coast) and only at larger time scale (permanent interdiction shows significant changes only considering periods of 5 - 10 years). Necessary samples for judging suitability for bathing or to put the temporary and / or permanent interdiction, are carried out fortnightly from April to September. According to the Decree of the President of the Republic (D.P.R) No. 470/82 are considered bathing waters those coastal water (and, if present, freshwater or lake) in which bathing is explicitly authorized or "not prohibited". All areas "permanently interdected" for bathing, indicated by the Region, are excluded from the control system, either if prohibited for reasons indipendent from pollution, for example due to the presence of ports, military zones, areas of full protection etc.. , or for pollution, resulting from laboratory analysis. The D.P.R. No 470/82 identifies as suitable for bathing waters whose parameters, analyzed with the frequency identified by the same decree, comply with those provided, at least in 90% of cases. For physical-chemical parameters not complying, the values must not exceed 50% of the maximum limits provided. For microbiological parameters, it is sufficient a compliance of 80% but this limit is increased to 95% when the concentrations of faecal coliforms and faecal streptococci exceed the peremptory limits and, simultaneously, the non-compliance due to chemical-physical parameters don’t reach values 50% higher than given limits. Are consideres not suitable for bathing even all those areas where there were no controls



in number compliant to laws or they have not been checked at all. These are, largely, shores of the smaller islands or stretches of coast difficult to reach. UNIT OF MEASUREMENT percentage DATA PROCESSING SCALE

- Spatial scale: provincial, municipal - Timing scale:

o Temporal coverage: 2000-2007 o Updating frequency: annual

DATA SOURCE All data are from elaboration by ARPA Sicilia based on data pubblished by Department of Healt, Healt Information System, Department of Prevention, ―Bathing water Quality‖. Summary of results of 2003-2007 seasons. DPSIR CLASSIFICATION State indicator REMARKS TABLES and PICTURES In table 1.1, in figures 1.12 and 1.13 are reported rate of suitable coast for bathing and interdicted coast due to pollution, and their trend from 2000 to 2007. Figure 1.13 shows cartography detailed at provincial scale, of distribution of coast suitability for bathing in Siciliy at the end of bathing season in 2007. STATUS and TREND

Data reported in table 1.1 and Figure 1.1 points out that percentage has already been almost high in the whole island since 2000, showing a mean of bathing coast of that controlled higher than 98%. During 2000-2006 period the percentage of bathing coast increased significantly, reaching a value of 100% in five out of eight provinces, reaching the percentage of 99% in the remaining three provinces. The value of 99% in Sicily, lower than in previous years, is dued to the increase in the percentage of costs controlled throughout the island. As to the percentage of interdected coast due to pollution/whole coast, data from all interdected coast due to pollution (included in Regional law) are to be considered excluding coastline ―permanently interdected‖ for pollution. Figure 1.1 shows the trend of pollution and suitability for bathing in the last eight years.



Table 1.1: Percentage of coast suitable for bathing (of that controlled) and of interdected coast due to pollution (upon the whole) (2003-2007).

bathing coast / coast controlled (%)

interdected coast due to pollution / whole coast (%)

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Agrigento 99,6 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0,2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Caltanissetta

91,2 91,2 91,2 91,2 91,2 91,2 100 91,6 7,3

7,3 7,3 7,3 7,3 7,3 0 7

Catania 98,7 98,2 98,6 98,5 98,1 98,2 100 96,5 1 1,3 1 6,4 6,4 4,1 0,7 2,4

Messina 99,8 99,8 99,4 99,5 99,5 99,5 99,2 99,1 0,1 0,2 0,6 0,5 0,5 0,4 0,7 0,7

Palermo 98,8 97,5 98,5 99 98,7 98,6 98,9 97,8 0,6 1,3 1,4 2,5 2,5 1,2 2,6 1,2

Ragusa 99,5 99,5 99,5 97,5 100 100 100 100 0,4 0,4 0,4 0 0 0 0 0

Siracusa 99,2 99,4 100 99,7 99,7 99,7 99,7 99,8 0,4 0,3 1,1 0,1 0,1 0,3 3,4 0,1

Trapani 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 0 0,5 0 0 0 0,5 0

Sicilia 99,3 99,2 99,3 99,1 99,3 99,3 99,6 99 0,4 0,5 0,8 0,9 0,9 0,6 1,1 0,6

Source: Elaboration based on Department of Health data, 2008.

Bathing and polluted Sicilian coast

98,0

98,5

99,0

99,5

100,0

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

anno

ba

thin

g c

oa

st

(%)

0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

1,2

inte

rde

cte

d c

oa

st

du

e t

o p

oll

uti

on

(%)

Costa balneabile / costa controllata (%)

Costa vietata per inquinamento / costa totale (%)

Source: Elaboration based on Department of Health data, 2008.

Figura 1.12: Trends of percentage of coast suitable for bathing/controlled

coast (2000-2007) and and of interdected coast due to pollution /the whole coast (2000-2007)



Costa Balneabile (%)

Costa insufficientemente campionata e/o non controllata (%)

Costa interdetta per inquinamento (%)

48%

52%

31%

67%

2%

85%

14% 1%

11%

89%

59%

41%

56%

44%

1%45%

54%

76%

7%17%

Source: Elaboration by ARPA Sicilia based on Department of Health data, 2008.

Figure 1.13: Cartography of distribution of suitability for bathing in Sicily detailed in provincial scale (2007).



EXAMPLE OF DRAWING UP OF DATA SHEET MODEL FOR CONTEST INDICATOR

Attachment 2 – ARPA SiCILIA GuidELine (From ―ARPA Sicilia, Annuario regionale dei dati ambientali 2007, Palermo, 2008‖ with modifications) INDICATOR

LAND USE SUSTAINABILITY DIMENSION Environmental PURPOSE Providing information about land coverage and use in municipal and provincial jurisdiction. DESCRIPTION This indicator expresses the articulation of territory based on the category of use (artificial areas, agricultural areas, forests, wetlands, water bodies) through data on extension, given in hectares and percentage, of land area for each category of use. It should to be elaborated with GIS instruments starting from studies on land use or the Corine Land Cover maps, with cartographic restitution of elaboration. UNIT of MEASUREMENT Hectares (ha), percentage (%) DATA PROCESSING SCALE

- Spatial scale: provincial - Timing scale:

o Temporal coverage: year 2000 o Updating frequency: five-yearly

DATA SOURCE Image & Corine Land Cover 2000 (APAT, 2004). DPSIR CLASSIFICATION State indicator REMARKS TABLES and PICTURES Table 5.1 shows, for each one of the 34 category of Corine Land Cover, Level 3, its surface (hectars) and its percentage upon the whole Sicilian land. The aggregated data at Level 1 of classification are graphically represented in Figure 5.1 and 5.2. Subsequently, in Table 5.2 and in Figure 5.3, it was analyzed for each province, the area and the percentage of different typologies of coverage and land use.



STATUS and TREND From elaboration of Corine Land Cover 2000 (APAT, 2004) data, results that most part of regional surface (63%) is covered by agricultural land, among which approximately 32% of the area is characterized by arable land, followed by woodland (mostly degraded forests and deciduous) and semi-natural areas (in most part pasture, fallow, bush scrubs), which cover 31% of the whole regional surface (Table 5.1 and Figure 5.1). Evaluating the spatial distribution of the typologies of land use, it results that most of the artificial surface (urbanization, infrastructure, industries, ports, etc..) and the one used for agriculture lies in the provinces of Palermo and Catania, the wooded areas are mainly in the province of Messina and Palermo, the water bodies in the province of Messina, and wetlands in the province of Trapani (Table 5.2 and Figure 5.3).



Table 5.1: Land use in Sicily (2000)

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Surface

(hectars)

% upon the

whole of regional

surface

Artificial

surfaces

Mines, dumps and

construction sites

Mineral extraction sites 7.350 0,28

Construction sites 387 0,02

Dump 54 0,00

Industrial, commercial and trasport units

Airports 2.209 0,09

Industrial and commercial units 9.831 0,38

Sea ports 754 0,03

Road and rail networks 499 0,02

Urban Fabric Continuous Urban Fabric 36.564 1,42

Discontinuous Urban Fabric 66.173 2,56

Artificial non-

agricultural vegetated areas

Sport and Leisure facilities 409 0,02

Green urban areas 546 0,02

Agricoltural

areas

Permanent crops

Fruit trees and berries plantations 167.726 6,50

Olive groves 240.823 9,33

Vineyards 161.747 6,26

Pastures Unimproved grassland 817.155 31,65

Heterogeneous

agricultural areas

Land principally occupied by agricolture with

significant areas of natural vegetation 77.371 3,00

Annual crops associated with permanent

crops 45.213 1,75

Complex cultivation patterns 127.093 4,92

Forest and

semi-natural areas

Open spaces with little

or no vegetation

Sparsely vegetated areas 25.633 0,99

Bare rocks 20.921 0,81

Beaches, dunes, sand 317 0,01

Forest

Coniferous forests 30.621 1,19

Broad-leaves forests 139.137 5,39

Mixed forests 23.052 0,89

Scrub and/or

herbaceous vegetation

associtions

Natural grassland 249.080 9,65

Transitional woodland scrub 53.416 2,07

Sclerophyllous vegetation 182.610 7,07

Moors and heathlands 83.557 3,24

Wetlands

Inner wetlands Inland marshes 154 0,01

Coastal wetland Salt marshes 538 0,02

Salines 1.473 0,06

Water

bodies

Continental waters Water bodies 5.390 0,21

Stream courses 3.991 0,15

Marine waters Estuaries 25 0,00

Total 2.581.819 100,00

Source: Elaborations by ARPA Sicilia based on data: APAT, Image & Corine Land Cover 2000 (2004)



Table 5.2: Land Use in Sicily (ha), for each province (2000)

Province Artificial

surfaces

Agricoltural

areas

Forest and semi-natural

areas

Wetlands Water bodies Grand total

Agrigento 11.573 224.336 68.693 71 454 305.127

Caltanissetta 5.031 165.516 42.909 337 213.793

Catania 24.118 219.852 112.927 345 357.242

Enna 3.580 168.294 84.078 1.527 257.480

Messina 19.036 100.873 203.008 3.372 326.290

Palerme 24.738 307.807 166.418 1.740 500.703

Ragusa 6.965 129.807 25.371 150 162.292

Syracuse 11.829 125.513 73.468 421 1.027 212.258

Trapani 17.905 195.129 31.474 1.673 453 246.634

Sicily 124.774 1.637.128 808.346 2.165 9.406 2.581.819


63,41

31,31

4,830,360,08

Superfici artificiali Superfici agricole utilizzate Territori boscati e ambienti semi-naturali Zone umide Corpi idrici


Figure 5.1: Surfaces distribution (%) of land cover/use in Sicily (2000)



-

200.000

400.000

600.000

800.000

1.000.000

1.200.000

1.400.000

1.600.000

1.800.000

Superfici artificiali Superfici agricole utilizzate Territori boscati e ambienti

semi-naturali

Zone umide Corpi idrici

su

perf

icie

(ett

ari

)

Source: Elaborations by ARPA Sicilia based on data: APAT, Image & Corine Land Cover 2000 (2004) Figure 5.2: Regional surface (ha) for each category of land use/cover (2000)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Agrigento Caltanissetta Catania Enna Messina Palermo Ragusa Siracusa Trapani

su

perf

icie

(%

)

Superfici artificiali Superfici agricole utilizzate Territori boscati e ambienti semi-naturali Zone umide Corpi idrici

Source: Elaboration ARPA Sicilia based on data: APAT, Image & Corine Land Cover 2000 (2004)

Figure 5.3: Surfaces distribution (%) of land use/cover for each province (2000)

Documents

Water Management Common List of Indicators & Database · Introduction . The present report ... This indicator expresses the mean level variation of the ground water per drilling or