Science-Policy interactions in the water sector Some

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

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

Looking at different sectors – Integrated knowledge and policy implications?

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

But also…. . WFD Linking knowledge to policy implementation – Anticipating & Feeding with research outputs linked to well defined Poliy milestones Adopted on 20. 12. 2000 +Parent legislation (e. g. Flood Directive) River basin districts Delineation water bodies 2005 Analysis of pressures and impacts 2005 Design of monitoring Programmes 2006 RBMP – 2009/2015 Programmes of Measures 2012 Classification of bodies ‘at risk’ Account of classification: þSurveillance monitoring þOperational monitoring (+ investigative monitoring) 6 years cycle / Review GOOD STATUS OBJECTIVE

R&D responding to driver’s needs, yes, but should we not put some order in the house to avoid missing opportunities? FP 6/7 IPs Research AQ RI UAT SK E BA RR SE A LIFE Demonstration & testing CO RI AG W Interreg Trans-boundary implementation W ate r 4 Al l Courtesy Bob Harris, Sheffield University COST Co-operation & networking n io at lu a n Ev tio of itiga s m tion op FP 6/7 ERA-Nets Co-operation and coordination of research IW SN RM OW -N e M t AN

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

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

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

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

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)?

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?

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

1 st 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 (decisionmakers), 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

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)

2 nd 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

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

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

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

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