19-10-2016, 09:55 AM
1459753443-waterpollution.pdf (Size: 4 MB / Downloads: 145)
Introduction
During recent years there has been increasing awareness of, and concern about, water
pollution all over the world, and new approaches towards achieving sustainable
exploitation of water resources have been developed internationally. It is widely agreed
that a properly developed policy framework is a key element in the sound management
of water resources. A number of possible elements for such policies have been identified,
especially during the preparation of Agenda 21 as well as during various follow up
activities.
This chapter proposes some general principles for the policy making process and for
policy document structure. Some examples of policy elements which support the overall
sustainable management of water resources are also given.
1.2 Policy framework
Policy statements regarding water pollution control can be found within the legislative
framework of most countries. However, the statements are often "hidden" in official
documents, such as acts of government, regulations, action and master plans. Moreover,
government statutes and constitutional documents often include paragraphs about
environmental policies. Such statements are rarely coherent, and inconsistencies with
other policies often exist because they have been developed separately with different
purposes.
Water pollution control is usually specifically addressed in connection with the
establishment of environmental legislation and action plans, but also within the
framework of water resources management planning. Moreover, documents related to
public health aspects may also consider water pollution. These three interacting areas
are often administered in different line ministries - typically a Ministry of Environment, a
Ministry of Water and a Ministry of Health. In addition, the policy making process, if it
exists, may often take place independently.
To reach a situation where the adopted political intentions can result in a real impact on
the practical management of water resources, it is important to define policy statements
clearly and in proper policy documents. It is recommended that the water pollution
control policy statements either be placed within a water resources policy document or
within an environment policy document, or the statements can form a document in
themselves, referring to overall health-water and resources-environment policies. The
approach selected will depend on the administrative organisation of water resources and
environmental management in a particular country.
Some general principles that should be considered within the policy making process are
as follows:
• A water pollution control policy, ideally, should be seen as part of a coherent policy
framework ranging from overall statements such as can be found in government statutes,
constitutions, etc., to specific policy statements defined for environment and water
resources management as well as for particular sector developments.
• The policy making process should therefore incorporate consultations and seek
consensus with all line ministries relevant for water resources management, including
organisations responsible for overall economic development policies. In addition, when
formulating new development policies for other sectors, water resources policy
statements should be taken into account where appropriate.
• Policy statements must be realistic. Good intentions reflected in statements such as
"No pollution of surface waters shall occur..." cannot be applied in practice and therefore
become meaningless in the context of an operational policy.
• The statements in a policy document need to be relatively long-lived because they
must pass a laborious political adaptation process. Thus, detailed guidelines, which may
need regular adaptation to the country's actual development level, should be avoided
and placed into the more dynamic parts of the legislation system, such as the regulation
framework, that can be amended at short notice.
1.2.1 The policy document
A policy document should be formulated clearly and concisely, but at the same time it
must be operational. This means that the statements should be easily understood and
the document should form a guide for administrators formulating laws and regulations as
well as those enforcing, and thereby interpreting, such texts. To fulfil these requirements
the policy document should include, in addition to very general statements, well
explained guiding principles for water pollution management as well as outlines for
strategies for the implementation of the policy.
1.2.2 Overall policy statements
The overall policy statements, relevant for water pollution control, define a government's
concept of the water resources as well as its long-term priorities for exploitation of the
resource. These statements should, preferably, be derived from the country's general
environment and water resources management policies. They should also document the
government's willingness to let management instruments ensure the long-term protection
and sustainable exploitation of water resources along with social and economic
development.
Agenda 21 adopted some conceptual statements concerning water resources, but which
apply to water pollution control as well as to other elements of water resources
management. Two central statements were "Fresh water should be seen as a finite and
vulnerable resource, essential to sustain life, development and the environment" and
"Water should be considered as a social and economic good with a value reflecting its
most valuable potential use". The latter statement suggests an overall concept for
prioritising water-related development activities.
1.3 Guiding principles for water pollution control
The guiding principles of the policy document put the political intentions into more
practical terms by setting a more detailed conceptual framework that supports the overall
policy objectives. It is recommended that these principles should be clarified by a short
narrative interpretation. The following guiding principles provide a suitable basis for
sound management of water pollution.
Prevent pollution rather than treating symptoms of pollution. Past experience has shown
that remedial actions to clean up polluted sites and water bodies are generally much
more expensive than applying measures to prevent pollution from occurring. Although
wastewater treatment facilities have been installed and improved over the years in many
countries, water pollution remains a problem, including in industrialised countries. In
some situations, the introduction of improved wastewater treatment has only led to
increased pollution from other media, such as wastewater sludge. The most logical
approach is to prevent the production of wastes that require treatment. Thus,
approaches to water pollution control that focus on wastewater minimisation, in-plant
refinement of raw materials and production processes, recycling of waste products, etc.,
should be given priority over traditional end-of-pipe treatments.
In many countries, however, an increasing proportion of water pollution originates from
diffuse sources, such as agricultural use of fertilisers, which cannot be controlled by the
approach mentioned above. Instead, the principle of "best environmental practice"
should be applied to minimise non-point source pollution. As an example, codes of good
agricultural practice that address the causes of water pollution from agriculture, such as
type, amount and time of application of fertilisers, manure and pesticides, can give
guidance to farmers on how to prevent or reduce pollution of water bodies. Good
agricultural practice is recognised by the United Nations Economic Commission for
Europe (UNECE) as a means of minimising the risk of water pollution and of promoting
the continuation of economic agricultural activity (UNECE, 1993).
Use the precautionary principle. There are many examples of the application and
discharge of hazardous substances into the aquatic environment, even when such
substances are suspected of having detrimental effects on the environment. Until now
the use of any substance and its release to the environment has been widely accepted,
unless scientific research has proved unambiguously a causal link between the
substance and a well-defined environmental impact. However, in most cases it takes a
very long time to establish such causal links, even where early investigations suggest
clear indications of such links. When, eventually, the necessary documentation is provided and action can be taken to abandon the use of the substance, substantial
environmental damage may already have occurred. Examples of such situations include
a number of pesticides which are now being abandoned because contamination of
groundwater resources has been demonstrated.
The examples clearly show that action to avoid potential environmental damage by
hazardous substances should not be postponed on the grounds that scientific research
has not proved fully a causal link between the substance and the potential damage
(UNECE, 1994).
Apply the polluter-pays-principle. The polluter-pays-principle, where the costs of pollution
prevention, control and reduction measures are borne by the polluter, is not a new
concept but has not yet been fully implemented, despite the fact that it is widely
recognised that the perception of water as a free commodity can no longer be
maintained. The principle is an economic instrument that is aimed at affecting behaviour,
i.e. by encouraging and inducing behaviour that puts less strain on the environment.
Examples of attempts to apply this principle include financial charges for industrial
waste-water discharges and special taxes on pesticides (Warford, 1994).
The difficulty or reluctance encountered in implementing the polluter-pays-principle is
probably due to its social and economic implications (Enderlein, 1995). Full application
of the principle would upset existing subsidised programmes (implemented for social
reasons) for supply of water and removal of wastewater in many developing countries.
Nevertheless, even if the full implementation of the polluter-pays-principle is not feasible
in all countries at present, it should be maintained as the ultimate goal.
Apply realistic standards and regulations. An important element in a water pollution
control strategy is the formulation of realistic standards and regulations. However, the
standards must be achievable and the regulations enforceable. Unrealistic standards
and non-enforceable regulations may do more harm than having no standards and
regulations, because they create an attitude of indifference towards rules and
regulations in general, both among polluters and administrators. Standards and
regulations should be tailored to match the level of economic and administrative capacity
and capability. Standards should be gradually tightened as progress is achieved in
general development and in the economic capability of the private sector. Thus, the
setting of standards and regulations should be an iterative and on-going process.
Balance economic and regulatory instruments. Until now, regulatory management
instruments have been heavily relied upon by governments in most countries for
controlling water pollution. Economic instruments, typically in the form of wastewater
discharge fees and fines, have been introduced to a lesser extent and mainly by
industrialised countries.
Compared with economic instruments, the advantages of the regulatory approach to
water pollution control is that it offers a reasonable degree of predictability about the
reduction of pollution, i.e. it offers control to authorities over what environmental goals
can be achieved and when they can be achieved (Bartone et al., 1994). A major
disadvantage of the regulatory approach is its economic inefficiency (see also Chapter
5). Economic instruments have the advantages of providing incentives to polluters to
modify their behaviour in support of pollution control and of providing revenue to finance pollution control activities. In addition, they are much better suited to combating nonpoint
sources of pollution. The setting of prices and charges are crucial to the success of
economic instruments. If charges are too low, polluters may opt to pollute and to pay,
whereas if charges are too high they may inhibit economic development.
Against this background it seems appropriate, therefore, for most countries to apply a
mixture of regulatory and economic instruments for controlling water pollution. In
developing countries, where financial resources and institutional capacity are very
limited, the most important criteria for balancing economic and regulatory instruments
should be cost-effectiveness (those that achieve the objectives at the least cost) and
administrative feasibility.
Apply water pollution control at the lowest appropriate level. The appropriate level may
be defined as the level at which significant impacts are experienced. If, for example, a
specific water quality issue only has a possible impact within a local community, then the
community level is the proper management level. If environmental impacts affect a
neighbouring community, then the appropriate management level is one level higher
than the community level, for example the river basin level.
On a wider scale, the appropriate management level may be the national level for major
water bodies where no significant water pollution impacts are anticipated for
neighbouring states. Where significant impacts occur in several nations, the appropriate
management level is international (e.g. an international river basin commission). The
important point is that decisions or actions concerning water pollution control should be
taken as close as possible to those affected, and that higher administrative levels should
enable lower levels to carry out decentralised management. However, in considering
whether a given administrative level is appropriate for certain water pollution control
functions, the actual capacity to achieve these functions (or the possibility of building it)
at that level should also be taken into account. Thus, this guiding principle intends to
initiate a process of decentralisation of water pollution control functions that is adapted to
administrative and technical feasibility.
Establish mechanisms for cross-sectoral integration. In order to ensure the co-ordination
of water pollution control efforts within water-related sectors, such as health and
agriculture, formal mechanisms and means of co-operation and information exchange
need to be established. Such mechanisms should:
• Allow decision makers from different sectors to influence water pollution policy.
• Urge them to put forward ideas and plans from their own sector with impacts on water
quality.
• Allow them to comment on ideas and plans put forward by other sectors.
For example, a permanent committee with representatives from the involved sectors
could be established. The functions and responsibilities of the cross-sectoral body would
typically include at least the following:
• Co-ordination of policy formulation on water pollution control.
• Setting of national water quality criteria and standards, and their supporting regulations.
• Review and co-ordination of development plans that affect water quality.
Resolution of conflicts between government bodies regarding water pollution issues
that cannot be resolved at a lower level.
Encourage participatory approach with involvement of all relevant stakeholders. The
participatory approach involves raising awareness of the importance of water pollution
control among policy-makers and the general public. Decisions should be taken with full
public consultation and with the involvement of groups affected by the planning and
implementation of water pollution control activities. This means, for example, that the
public should be kept continuously informed, be given opportunities to express their
views, knowledge and priorities, and it should be apparent that their views have been
taken into account.
Various methods exist to implement public participation, such as interviews, public
information sessions and hearings, expert panel hearings and site visits. The most
appropriate method for each situation should take account of local social, political,
historical, cultural and other factors. In many countries in transition, for example, only
professional and scientific experts usually participate and other groups have mostly been
excluded from the process. Public participation may take time but it increases public
support for the final decision or result and, ideally, contributes to the convergence of the
views of the public, governmental authorities and industry on environmental priorities
and on water pollution control measures.
Give open access to information on water pollution. This principle is directly related to
the principle of involvement of the general public in the decision-making process,
because a precondition for participation is free access to information held by public
authorities. Open access to information helps to stimulate understanding, discussions
and suggestions for solutions of water quality problems. In many countries, notably the
countries in economic transition and the developing countries, there is no tradition of
open access to environmental information. Unfortunately, this attitude may seriously
jeopardise the outcome of any international co-operation that is required.
Promote international co-operation on water pollution control. Trans-boundary water
pollution, typically encountered in large rivers, requires international co-operation and
co-ordination of efforts in order to be effective. Lack of recognition of this fact may lead
to wasteful investments in pollution load reductions in one country if, due to lack of cooperation,
measures are introduced upstream that have counteractive effects. In a
number of cases (e.g. the Danube, Zambezi and Mekong rivers), permanent
international bodies with representatives from riparian states have been successfully
established, with the objective of strengthening international co-operation on the
pollution control of the shared water resources.
A framework for international co-operation on water pollution control that has been
widely agreed is the Convention on the Protection and Use of Trans-boundary
Watercourses and International Lakes (UNECE, 1994). Although some countries have
already started international co-operation on water pollution control, there is still a huge
need for concerted planning and action at the international level.
Strategy formulation
Strategy formulation for water pollution control should be undertaken with due
consideration to the above mentioned guiding principles, as well as to other principles for
water resources management laid down in various documents, e.g. Agenda 21, that
have been widely agreed. When formulating a water pollution control strategy, it should
be ensured that various complementary elements of an effective water pollution control
system are developed and strengthened concurrently. For example, financial resources
would not be used very effectively by spending them all on the formulation of policies
and the drafting of legislation, standards and regulations, if there is no institutional
capacity to fill the established framework and enforce the regulations.
The main components of a rational water pollution control system can be defined as:
• An enabling environment, which is a framework of national policies, legislation and
regulations setting the scene for polluters and management authorities.
• An institutional framework that allows for close interaction between various
administrative levels.
• Planning and prioritisation capabilities that will enable decision-makers to make
choices between alternative actions based on agreed policies, available resources,
environmental impacts and the social and economic consequences.
All three components are needed in order to achieve effective water pollution control and
it is, therefore, advisable to develop all three components hand-in-hand.
At the policy level the strategy must provide general directions for water quality
managers on how to realise the objectives of the water pollution control policies and on
how to translate the guiding principles into practical management. The strategy should
provide adequate detail to help identify and formulate concrete actions and projects that
will contribute to achieving the defined policies.
1.5 References
Bartone, C., Bernstein, J., Leitmann, J. and Eigen, J. 1994 Toward Environmental
Strategies for Cities: Policy Considerations for Urban Development Management in
Developing Countries. UNDP/UNCHS/World Bank, Urban Management Programme,
Washington, D.C.
Enderlein, R.E. 1995 Protecting Europe's water resources: Policy issues. Wat. Sci. Tech.,
31(8), 1-8.
UNECE 1993 Protection of Water Resources and Aquatic Ecosystems. Water Series No.
1, ECE/ENVWA/31, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, New York.
UNECE 1994 Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses
and International Lakes. ECE/ENHS/NONE/1, Geneva, United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe, New York.
Warford, J.J. 1994 Environment, health, and sustainable development: The role of
economic instruments and policies. Discussion paper for the Director General's Council
on the Earth Summit Action Programme for Health and Environment, June 1994, World
Health Organization, Geneva.
Chapter 2* - Water Quality Requirements
* This chapter was prepared by Ute S. Enderlein, Rainer E. Enderlein and W. Peter
Williams
2.1 Introduction
Control of water pollution has reached primary importance in developed and a number of
developing countries. The prevention of pollution at source, the precautionary principle
and the prior licensing of wastewater discharges by competent authorities have become
key elements of successful policies for preventing, controlling and reducing inputs of
hazardous substances, nutrients and other water pollutants from point sources into
aquatic ecosystems (see Chapter 1).
In a number of industrialised countries, as well as some countries in transition, it has
become common practice to base limits for discharges of hazardous substances on the
best available technology (see Chapters 3 and 5). Such hazardous water pollutants
include substances that are toxic at low concentrations, carcinogenic, mutagenic,
teratogenic and/or can be bioaccumulated, especially when they are persistent. In order
to reduce inputs of phosphorus, nitrogen and pesticides from non-point sources
(particularly agricultural sources) to water bodies, environmental and agricultural
authorities in an increasing number of countries are stipulating the need to use best
environmental practices (Enderlein, 1996).
In some situations, even stricter requirements are necessary. A partial ban on the use of
some compounds or even the total prohibition of the import, production and use of
certain substances, such as DDT and lead- or mercury-based pesticides, may constitute
the only way to protect human health, the quality of waters and their aquatic flora and
fauna (including fish for human consumption) and other specific water uses (ECLAC,
1989; UNECE, 1992; United Nations, 1994).
Some water pollutants which become extremely toxic in high concentrations are,
however, needed in trace amounts. Copper, zinc, manganese, boron and phosphorus,
for example, can be toxic or may otherwise adversely affect aquatic life when present
above certain concentrations, although their presence in low amounts is essential to
support and maintain functions in aquatic ecosystems. The same is true for certain
elements with respect to drinking water. Selenium, for example, is essential for humans
but becomes harmful or even toxic when its concentration exceeds a certain level.
The concentrations above which water pollutants adversely affect a particular water use
may differ widely. Water quality requirements, expressed as water quality criteria and
objectives, are use-specific or are targeted to the protection of the most sensitive water
use among a number of existing or planned uses within a catchment.
Approaches to water pollution control initially focused on the fixed emissions approach
(see Chapter 3) and the water quality criteria and objectives approach. Emphasis is now
shifting to integrated approaches. The introduction of holistic concepts of water
management, including the ecosystem approach, has led to the recognition that the use
of water quality objectives, the setting of emission limits on the basis of best available
technology and the use of best available practices, are integral instruments of prevention,
control and reduction of water pollution (ICWE, 1992; UNCED, 1992; UNECE, 1993).
These approaches should be applied in an action-orientated way (Enderlein, 1995). A
further development in environmental management is the integrated approach to air, soil,
food and water pollution control using multimedia assessments of human exposure
pathways.
2.2 Why water quality criteria and objectives?
Water quality criteria are developed by scientists and provide basic scientific information
about the effects of water pollutants on a specific water use (see Box 2.1). They also
describe water quality requirements for protecting and maintaining an individual use.
Water quality criteria are based on variables that characterise the quality of water and/or
the quality of the suspended particulate matter, the bottom sediment and the biota. Many
water quality criteria set a maximum level for the concentration of a substance in a
particular medium (i.e. water, sediment or biota) which will not be harmful when the
specific medium is used continuously for a single, specific purpose. For some other
water quality variables, such as dissolved oxygen, water quality criteria are set at the
minimum acceptable concentration to ensure the maintenance of biological functions.
Most industrial processes pose less demanding requirements on the quality of
freshwater and therefore criteria are usually developed for raw water in relation to its use
as a source of water for drinking-water supply, agriculture and recreation, or as a habitat
for biological communities. Criteria may also be developed in relation to the functioning
of aquatic ecosystems in general. The protection and maintenance of these water uses
usually impose different requirements on water quality and, therefore, the associated
water quality criteria are often different for each use.
Box 2.1 Examples of the development of national water quality criteria and guidelines
Nigeria
In Nigeria, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (FEPA) issued, in 1988, a specific
decree to protect, to restore and to preserve the ecosystem of the Nigerian environment. The
decree also empowered the agency to set water quality standards to protect public health and to
enhance the quality of waters. In the absence of national comprehensive scientific data, FEPA
approached this task by reviewing water quality guidelines and standards from developed and
developing countries as well as from international organisations and, subsequently, by comparing
them with data available on Nigeria's own water quality. The standards considered included those
of Australia, Brazil, Canada, India, Tanzania, the United States and the World Health
Organization (WHO). These sets of data were harmonised and used to generate the Interim
National Water Quality Guidelines and Standards for Nigeria. These address drinking water,
recreational use of water, freshwater aquatic life, agricultural (irrigation and livestock watering)
and industrial water uses. The guidelines are expected to become the maximum allowable limits
for inland surface waters and groundwaters, as well as for non-tidal coastal waters. They also
apply to Nigeria's transboundary watercourses, the rivers Niger, Benue and Cross River, which
are major sources of water supply in the country. The first set of guidelines was subject to
revision by interested parties and the general public. A Technical Committee comprising experts
from Federal ministries, State Governments, private sector organisations, higher educational
institutions, nongovernmental organisations and individuals is now expected to review the
guidelines from time to time.