[MUSIC] [MUSIC] Hello Florence. I am delighted to welcome you to this session covering management and pollution in the Rhine basin. To start can you please introduce yourself. >> Thank you for the invitation. My name is Florence Metz. I am a PhD candidate in Political Science at the University of Bern, and I work within Professor Karin Ingold’s team on issues of, and on the policy of water protection and governance issues in relation to political networks. >> So the Rhine is often cited as an example of integrated water management, of integrated watershed management, however, the issue of micropollutants came to light more recently. Can you tell me what are the driving forces behind the consideration of this problem in particular? >> So awareness of micropolluants comes from an observation which seemed contradictory at first. On the one hand we saw that water is becoming increasingly clean following the construction of wastewater treatment plants, for example. But on the other hand, we also found that in some places there were less fish. Then the researchers analysed the water and found very small concentrations of substances in the surface water, called micropolluants. These substances come from pesticides used in agriculture, they come from industry but also, and this is a new observation, they come from cosmetics, household products and pharmaceuticals such as the contraceptive pill or the blood thinners taken by the elderly. And the researchers found that despite the low concentrations, these chemicals influence the hormonal system of fish meaning they are unable to reproduce. That is one of the reasons why, in certain places, there are fewer fish. The risks for man are even less known but for water policy the question of how to react is presented. Do we adopt policy measures because one can not exclude the risk to humans or do we wait to have certainties that there is a risk before we react? And here it is interesting to see that Switzerland responded to this question and took action as one of the first countries to do so. And the action was to equip sewage treatment plants with a new technology that is capable of filtering certain micropollutants from wastewater. And now it is interesting to see if Switzerland will be able to share its policy with other countries in the Rhine basin or even at European level? And there, really, the Rhine plays a key role. On one hand, Switzerland is not part, is not a member of the EU, but on the other hand, Switzerland is allied with Germany, France, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, within the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR). And it can share its ideas within the commission. And now it would be interesting to see if Switzerland will be able to disseminate its policy on micropollutants, at a European level, through the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine. >> The Swiss example, the case study, demonstrates the application of this precautionary principle. >> But how is this issue integrated in the discussions between riparian states? >> With my colleague, Manuel Fischer of EAWAG, we researched the networks within which the issue of micropollutants is discussed by Rhine riparian states. And do we make a distinction between formal and informal networks? In the first graphic you see, you see formal networks where riparian states, and actors of the riparian states, are found on a regular basis, in some institutions, to discuss micropolluants. And there, interestingly, is that the ICPR, the International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine is the most central institution. In grey, you see the institutions, and the ICPR is the most central institution where riparian states are found regularly. And research projects link actors from different countries of the Rhine, internationally on the issue. And what is interesting to see is that the Swiss actors, shown in black, are as well integrated into the international governance network as actors from other countries. The second graph shows informal networks where actors exchanged directly, not through the institutions, but directly on the issue of micropollutants. And this is interesting. In the entire network of EAWAG, the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology is the most central actor, most consulted on questions of micropollutants. Also from Switzerland, the FOEN, the Federal Office for the Environment is a central actor. This shows that at the international level of the Rhine basin, Swiss players are known for their scientific knowledge, and also their policies in this area. >> Okay, so now, more concretely, if we look at actions taken, what scales are used when these actions are implemented? And the other question that comes ahead of this first question. Is it a problem, ultimately, that can only be treated on the watershed scale? So for now, the measures are taken on a national scale. At a European level, of the European Union, members of the European Union have agreed certain environmental quality standards in the Water Framework Directive and its offshoot directives. These environmental quality standards set objectives and limit the concentration levels that can not be exceeded for defined substances. And if a member state exceeds this limit, it is the member state that has to take policy measures to reduce micropollluants. That is why I say, at the moment, measures are taken at the national level. But the optimal scale depends on the aspect of the problem. And to see this in more depth with Professor Karin Ingold, we worked on the characteristics of micropollutants as a policy issue. It can be seen that the micropollutants present a very complex policy problem. There are certain substances that pose a problem, a big problem, which are hazardous, toxic, bioaccumulants, and persistent in surface water. And for these substances, it is appropriate to take measures at the national level, or even internationally. But other substances pose more local problems. For example, when very specific industrial productions use substances which are not used elsewhere, it is possible that the micropollutants remain geographically local, and in this case, local measures or regional may be appropriate. Other substances are only used in certain seasons, for example in agriculture. And then you see that the problem of micropollutants is complex from a policy perspective. There is not a single optimal scale against which we can implement measures. But to ensure that the various measures undertaken by different riparian states on different scales are not contradictory, watershed management can be particularly suitable. Because watershed management promotes Integrated Water Resources Management and can ensure the protection of water resources in a particularly efficient manner. If you want to address the question more thoroughly, I invite you to read the article that you can download at the following link. >> Very good, thank you Florence for that contribution and the presentation of this case study, this well known case study of the Rhine. Thank you. [MUSIC] [MUSIC]
