evaluation of the study visit - Mekong River Commission

MRC Study Visit to the Danube River Basin 2012
� The European Union provides a strong framework providing a consolidated basis for river basin
management that have to be followed by all EU Member States.
� The EU WFD and the accompanying Common Implementation Strategy process was rated a very
good tool for effective river basin management, a targeted management tool to achieve joint
objectives and consensus as well as a sufficient basis to support transparent communication and
stakeholder involvement.
� Following the same objectives all over Europe and the legally binding character of the EU WFD
for EU Member States is seen as an advantage in comparison to the situation in the LMB and
MRC framework.
� In general, similar approaches as required in the EU WFD would be possible for LMB
implementation but the MRC legal framework is seen as a challenge (e.g. the MRC Procedures
do not have the same legally binding character as the EU WFD).
� The EU Common Implementation Strategy provides a strong guiding basis for coherent
implementation. The use of non-binding guidance documents in this respect was valued as
important
� The River Basin Management Plans are complex in its content and follow same idea all over
Europe, which supports efficient international cooperation including the river basin
management in the DRB.
� The basic philosophy of the BDP and the Basin Development Strategy is seen similar in
comparison with the WFD.
� However, for practical implementation specific issues of the EU WFD should be screened in
more detail as a Study Visit follow-up for possible adaptation in the LMB. This includes aspects
like the environmental objectives, the identification of significant water management issues and
approaches for environmental baselines assessment.
� In summary, specific RBM/IWRM points to be possibly adapted for MRC purposes could include
the EU WFD’s approaches regarding biological monitoring, assessment of ecological water status
including environmental baselines/reference conditions, approaches on hydromorphology and
heavily modifies water bodies in relation to future infrastructure development, economic
approaches, public participation and implementation of similar approaches as applied in the
Common Implementation Strategy.
The International Commission for the Protection for the Danube River (ICPDR)
Taking into account the MRC framework/link and learning points highlighted by the Study Visit
participants, it can be concluded:
� Comparing the MRC and ICPDR, the structure of the Commissions is different due to the fact
that the ICPDR is fully decentralised operating via a very small Secretariat with 8 staff members
and several technical Expert Groups that report for resolutions at the two Plenary Meetings
each year.
� A similar structure could be followed by the MRC during its decentralisation process. However,
this is still a long was to go regarding both time and restructuring.
� The MRC could learn from the ICPDR experiences in particular regarding the set-up, operation
and tasks of the different ICPDR Expert Groups that develop most of the reports rather than via
consultancy.
[23]