case study: Rhine

1. Name Partner

Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières (BRGM), Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

2. General case study characteristics

2a. Geographical characteristics

The Rhine catchment covers an area of ca. 200,000 km² and has a population of ca. 58 million. The main stream is about 1320 km long flowing through 9 countries (of which 7 are EU members). In France, the study will focus on two sub-districts of the Rhine: the Rhine river itself and its direct tributaries located in the Alsace region (8 160 km²); and the Moselle and Saar basins up to the German border (15 360 km²). This includes 416 river stretches, 15 groundwater bodies (+11 partly shared with Meuse river basin); 32 lakes, 26 artificial water bodies. In the Netherlands, the study will focus on the Rhine-West district (12 090 km²).

2b. Land use characteristics

The two French sub-districts include remote and mountainous areas, where water resources are not subject to significant pressures, as well as densely populated and industrialised areas, where rivers are under significant pressures. The Dutch Rhine-West area lies mostly below sea level and is characterised by polders and canals and includes the North Sea coastline. Almost 60% of the area is used for agriculture and it is densely populated (Randstad).

3. Pressure and impact analysis

3a. Main pressure(s) and/or pollutant(s)

Main sources of pollution: Agriculture (FR, NL), mining (FR), industry (FR, NL), households/WWTP (FR, NL). In Holland most chemical pollution comes from upstream countries. Other uses (navigation, energy, gravel extraction) are upcoming sources of pollution.

Agriculture: diffuse nitrates and pesticides pollution (60% of water bodies in Moselle, 36% Rhine-FR).
Mining (iron and coal in Loraine region, potash in Alsace): point source pollution of rivers and aquifers. Industry is a major source of pollution in both French districts. 165 point sources in NL (85% of all NL point source pollution), emission Ni, P, N, Zn, Cu. Cooling water extraction NL: 44% of total water extraction.
Households/WWTP: 35% pollution of WB in Moselle Sarre, 15% point source pollution in NL.

3b. Impact(s)

Surface water bodies FR: 16% artificial and HMWB; 49% at risk; 17% lack of information; 18% good status. 30% of surface water bodies as Heavily Modified Water Bodies. In NL all surface water bodies will be at risk or possibly at risk, and less than 10% of the water bodies will meet a ‘good ecological status’: the situation will deteriorate in spite of current policies. Morphological changes for navigation and water level management (55% of water use in NL) have affected absorption capacity, flooding protection and nutrient uptake. Main impacts are eutrophication, toxicity, chemical pollution, and salinization.

4. Definition goods and services provided by aquatic ecosystem

Most important goods and services provided by the aquatic ecosystem include drinking water, transportation, recreation, irrigation water, cooling water and water used for other industrial processes such as food processing, chemical products (NL) and paper industry (FR). Other services include nutrient storage and uptake, carbon sequestration, biodiversity and habitat, flood protection/water storage.

5. Beneficiaries / stakeholders involved

Households (drinking water, recreation), industry (cooling, process water), agriculture (irrigation), shipping (transport). Fisheries and mining play a minor role.

6. Definition environmental and resource costs and benefits

Environmental costs are the costs of not reaching good ecological status by 2015. FR uses three type of environmental costs: costs due to hydromorphological modification of rivers; environmental costs due to river / aquifer pollution; costs due to river / aquifer over-exploitation (quantitative aspects).

7. Main objective monetary valuation environmental and resource costs and benefits

Estimation of environmental and resource benefits of reaching good ecological status for inclusion in cost-benefit analysis of the identified WFD programme of measures to underpin possible derogation according to Article 4 and classification of Heavily Modified Water Bodies.

8. Economic valuation method

FR: not decided yet. NL: choice experiment/contingent valuation to assess use and non-use values associated with reaching a good ecological status in 2015.

9. Key methodological issues

Linking economic values to pressure and/or biological impact indicators
Aggregation/upscaling economic values from individual water body to basin level
Benefits transfer across sub-basins, taking into account spatial (upstream-downstream) interrelationships and possible substitution effects (e.g. recreation)
Possibility of creating a GIS based value map

10. Available data, information sources and stakeholder involvement

Cost benefit analysis of groundwater remediation in the potash mining fields of Alsace (study by BRGM, finished & published),
Assessment of past and future damage costs of groundwater pollution with nitrates and pesticides in Alsace (study by BRGM, finished & published)
Assessment of the cost of the WFD programme of measures to achieve good status in the Rhine – Moselle – Sarre – Meuse French river district (study by BRGM, on going)
Assessment of the benefits of protecting groundwater against VOC contamination in Alsace with CV survey (BRGM, Bridge project, on going).
CV studies for recreational swimming water and general water quality in Holland.
Collection of GIS maps

Status reports of sub-basins of the Rhine river basin:

Case Study Status Report Upper Rhine Basin, France, May 2007 [pdf, 480 KB]

Case Study Status Report West-Rhine Basin, Netherlands, May 2007 [pdf, 2.2 MB]