Irrigation Development in Under Water Framework Directive

Slavisa Trajkovic, Srdjan Kolakovic Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Nis Nis, Serbia and Montenegro

Abstract Adoption of Water Framework Directive (WFD) is a turning point in development of European water resources. For the first time in the history of Europe, a unified and uniform strategy for the environment protection and water resources management was created. The goal of this paper is to point at some new events in the irrigation development in Serbia resulting from the application of the WFD. The application of the WFD can result in big changes in irrigation. One of the goals of the WFD is rationalization of the water consumption, which in the countries with the developed irrigation means that the consumption of water in the irrigation systems ought to be decreased. The second goal is the decrease of the water resources pollution. The recent investigation has demonstrated that agriculture took over the ignominious leadership in the environment pollution. Industry, which was for decades the primary polluter, is now put under control by the introduction of the waste water control and by the construction of waste water treatment facilities. In the intensive irrigation conditions, the artificial fertilizers and plants protection chemicals are washed off from the land into the recipients along with the excess water. The WFD sees a solution in the introduction of the principle “user pays” and “polluter pays”. So, the price of water is introduced as an instrument that should reduce the consumption and pollution of waters. From the irrigation aspect, it means the increase of the net water price, because, in the most of the countries, the end user pays only a portion of the real price of water. All the stated brings about the changes in this agricultural area. The choice of the irrigation method providing the rational water consumption and little water loss is emphasized. Also, the crop patterns with the plant sorts more resistant to water shortage will be an advantage. The introduction of the principle “user pays” may provoke a certain resistance in the farmers who are the users of the irrigation systems. Water, must become an economic category. This requirement should be fulfilled not because of the EU, but for our own sake. Nevertheless, the level of understanding of water resources problems in Serbia is very low. The behavior of the previous regime which did not observe economic logic has resulted in the great deal of population thinking that the state is obliged to provide water for all the users at low, non-economic prices. The authors surveyed the public (users of water) on the question of irrigation of the field. This survey has demonstrated that the large majority of farmers (87%) understand the importance of irrigation, but a negligible part of the respondents accepts the fact that the construction of the system inevitably leads to the changes in the agricultural production (new, different sorts of crop, modern irrigation methods, and economic price of water). The construction of the irrigation system effects the modernization of the complete agricultural production. However, the expressed attitudes demonstrate that there is a strong resistance of the potential users of water to any modernization. In this case, there are no realistic conditions for the successful operation of the irrigation system, so that the construction cannot be recommended in this region. The obtained result demonstrate that one of the reasons for degrading of a large number of the irrigation systems in Serbia lies perhaps in the fact that no public was consulted in the making of decision to build the systems.

Key-words: Water Framework Directive, Irrigation, Public participation, Serbia

Introduction The European Union policy in a certain field is carried out through the directives issued by the European Parliament and EU Council. These directives do not only oblige the member states, but also all the candidate states for the EU pay a due attention to the to the EU directives, in order to adjust the local regulations to the legislature of the EU. The European parliament and the EU Council adopted the directive 2000/60/EC (Water Framework Directive) on 23rd of October 2000. This directive was issued on 22 th of December 2000 in the Official Journal of the European Communities (OJ) L 327, pages 1 – 72, and it came into effect on the same

day (Article 25 of this directive). The Water Framework Directive has twenty-six articles and eleven annexes. It was supplemented by the Decision of the European Parliament and Council 2455/2001/EC since 20th of November 2001 that was issued on 15th of December 2001 (OJ L 331, p.1) and came into effect a day later. By this Decision, a list of priority substances in the area of water resources is established and added as the Annex X to the Water Framework Directive (Article 1, Decision 2445/2001/EC). Adoption of the Water Framework Directive is a turning point in the development of the European water resources management. For the first time in the history of Europe, a uniform strategy for environment protection and water resources management was created. The water resources in the territory of the EU become the concern of the whole Union and no autonomous decision making of the individual state in this field is allowed. The importance of this directive surpasses the boundaries of the European Union. By the force of its political and economic authority, the EU manages to enforce the directive not only in the candidate countries, but in all the countries which have the common large river basins with the EU. It is in the best interest of the Serbian water resources management to, irrespective whether Serbia will become a member of the EU or not, pay a due attention to the Water Framework Directive, and other water resources related EU directives. Many studies presented examples of WFD implementation. This paper mentions only a few latest papers. Tison et al. (2005) describes the different natural and disturbed community types found throughout the French hydrosystem. Dodkins et al. (2005) uses a single permutation procedure for developing the optimal river typology for biological elements within the WFD. Kay et al. (2005) focuses on the relationships between land use and faecal indicator organism concentrations in the Ribble drainage basin which is the single UK sentinel study area chosen for examining the implementation of the WFD. In Serbia, only few papers that were aimed at informing the professional public with the significance of the Water Framework Directive were published (Petkovic et al. 2003, Petkovic 2004). Considerably lower number of papers deals with the irrigation under WFD. Bazzari et al. (2005) evaluates the economic, social and environmental sustainability of irrigated farming land under different scenarios concerning water policy and the Common Agricultural Policy. According to the first results, the impact of the WFD may be summed up in a minor reduction of water use with a sharp decrease of farm income and a significant reduction of employment. Gomez-Limon and Riesgo (2005) uses Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) mathematical programming models for analyzing the different impact that a pricing policy for irrigation water would have. The irrigation problems in the light of WFD application were not paid due attention up to now. The goal of this paper is to point at some new events in the irrigation development in Serbia which are the result of the application of the WFD.

Irrigation and WFD The agriculture consumes the greatest deal of water in the world, and it comprises 70% of total consumption. (UN WWD Report 2003). More than 40% of food required for nutrition is provided from the irrigated area. The situation is similar in the Mediterranean countries of the EU. In Italy, agriculture consumes 50 % of water, and 55% of agricultural output is produced via irrigation (Bazzani et al. 2004). The application of the WFD can result in big changes in irrigation. One of the goals of the WFD is rationalization of the water consumption, which in the countries with the developed irrigation means that the consumption of water in the irrigation systems ought to be decreased. The second goal is the decrease of the water resources pollution. The recent investigation has demonstrated that agriculture took over the ignominious leadership in the environment pollution. Industry, which was for decades the primary polluter, is now put under control by the introduction of the waste water control and by the construction of waste water treatment facilities. In the intensive irrigation conditions, the artificial fertilizers and plants protection chemicals are washed off from the land into the recipients along with the excess water. The WFD sees a solution in the introduction of the principle “user pays” and “polluter pays”. So, the price of water is introduced as an instrument that should reduce the consumption and pollution of waters. From the irrigation aspect, it means the increase of the net water price, because, in the most of the countries, the end user pays only a portion of the real price of water. All the stated brings about the changes in this agricultural area. The choice of the irrigation method providing the rational water consumption and little water loss is emphasized. Also, the crop patterns with the plant sorts more resistant to water shortage will be an advantage. Irrigation in Serbia, due to its low level of development, has its specific problems in comparison to the countries with the well-developed irrigation. Agriculture in Serbia consumes little water, so that water is not a limiting factor in the irrigation development. The environment has not been significantly endangered by the irrigation; because it is carried out only on some 30,000 ha which is less than 1% of the available land (Petkovic 2003). However, the introduction of the principle “user pays” may provoke a certain resistance of the farmers who are the users of the irrigation systems. Water must become an economic category. This requirement should be fulfilled not because of the EU, but for our own sake. There are no conditions for the development of any branch of water resource without an economic price of water. Never the less, the level of understanding of water resources problems in Serbia is very low. The long lasting regime which did not respect an economic logic has resulted in the great deal of population thinking that the state is obliged to provide water for all the users by low prices, non-economic prices. The right question for the countries in transition is to what extent the public, including the users of water, are ready to actively take part in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive. Attempting to obtain the answer to this question, the Regional center for the sustainable development and ecology of Nis, surveyed the public (users of water) on the question of irrigation of the Leskovac field. The irrigation was taken as an example since the implementation of the Water Framework Directive, in the part of introduction of the economic price of water (Article 9) may produce a certain resistance at the farmers, who are the end users of the irrigation systems.

Case study Irrigation of the Leskovac field has been topical since 1960 when the design of the irrigation of the Leskovac field was completed, which envisaged irrigation of 3,400 ha from the Southern Morava River. This design was not realize. This idea was re-actualized when the reservoir on the Veternica River was built. The analyses showed that at least 3,000 ha of arable land could be irrigated with this water (Potic and Trajkovic 2003). The municipality of Leskovac adopted the Municipality development strategy, where the prominent place is occupied by the irrigation. In the public discussion prior to the adoption of this document, the opinion of the users of water was not heard. The survey (of the users of water) was conducted by the mid July 2003, in the villages Donji Bunibrod, Gornji Bunibrod, Donji , Gornji Guberevac and Velika Grabovnica. These villages, inhabited by around 4,000 people, are in the immediate vicinity of Southern Morava River, in the most fertile section of the Leskovac field. The most part of the villagers is agricultural and there is a long tradition of irrigation in these villages. One hundred and seventeen households took part in the survey, and they were chosen randomly. The respondents could complete assertions: 1. Irrigation is necessary a) Yes b) No c) Partially 2. I irrigate a) 70-100% b) 30-70% c) Less than 30% d) I do not irrigate 3. I use for irrigation: a) Groundwater b) Running waters c) Standing waters d) Other 4. Most frequently used irrigation method a) Surface irrigation b) Sprinklers c) Other 5. In irrigation, I use the advices of: a) A experts b) Other farmers c) I use none’s advices 6. Do you need new irrigation equipment a) Yes b) No c) Perhaps, but I cannot buy it 7. If an irrigation system is constructed, I am ready to pay a) 80-100% of the fee b) 40-80% of the fee c) Less than 40% d) I would not use the water 8. If an irrigation system is constructed, I am ready to cultivate other crops. a) Yes b) No c) Perhaps

Table 1. Results of the survey of the irrigation water users

Attitude Number of % of the % of those Attitude Number of % of the % of respondent total number who respondent total number those s of irrigate s of who respondents respondents irrigate I V 1a 102 87.2 - 5a 3 2.6 2.9 1b 4 3.4 - 5b 12 10.3 11.5 1c 11 9.4 - 5c 89 76.1 85.6 II VI 2a 6 5.1 - 6a 2 1.7 1.9 2b 38 32.5 - 6b 66 56.4 63.5 2c 60 51.3 - 6c 36 30.8 34.6 2d 13 11.1 - - - - - III VII 3a 93 79.5 89.4 7a 3 2.6 - 3b 11 9.4 10.6 7b 6 5.1 - 3c 0 0.0 0.0 7c 17 14.5 - 3d 0 0.0 0.0 7d 91 77.8 - IV VIII 4a 101 86.3 97.1 8a 5 4.3 - 4b 3 2.6 2.9 8b 64 54.7 - 4c 0 0.0 0.0 8c 48 41.0 -

A large majority of the respondents, more than 87%, supports the attitude on the necessity of irrigation. Around 89% of the respondents irrigate their agricultural land. However, the most of them (60 respondents, 51%) irrigates less than 30% of their land. For irrigation, the underground water is mostly used (89% of the respondents who irrigate), and the surface irrigation is the dominating method (97% of the respondents who irrigate). Such response indirectly indicates that the equipment of the majority of respondents consists only of the pumps. The answer to question no 6 shows that 66 respondents (around 64% of the respondents who irrigate) are quite satisfied with such modest equipment. Only two respondents expressed a wish to buy the new, modern equipment, which in accordance with the opinion expressed by 89 respondents, that they do not use the advices of the experts or other farmers in irrigation. The Water Framework Directive introduces the principle of the economic price of water from 2010 on (article 9 of the Directive). The answers to question no 7 showed that almost 78% of the respondents refused to use the water from the system if they had to pay at least a portion of the real price of water. Only three respondents agreed to pay more than 80% of the economic price of water The explanation offered to the surveyors was that up to now, the irrigation water is for free. The construction of the irrigation system comprises the change of crop structure, more extensive presence of the industrial cultures (sugar beet, sunflower, soybean), and introduction of precrops for the industrial cultures and other crop (Molnar et al. 1989). However, only 5 respondents wished to change its crop structure. Such answer could be expected after the attitude of the majority that does not want to pay not a part of the economic price of water. If the answers to seventh and eighth question are compared, a certain disharmony in the answers may be observed. Even though 91 respondents claimed that they would not use the water from the irrigation system, only 64 said that they would not change the crop structure. There are two basic reasons for such disharmony: either the respondents did not understand the eighth question well; or the significant part of the respondents was thinking about using the water from the system and would perhaps change their opinion if they were acquainted with all the advantages of the irrigation system and wit the need for the rational usage and protection of waters. The survey results have been given in the table 2. The construction of the irrigation system effects the modernization of the complete agricultural production. However, the expressed attitudes demonstrate that there is a strong resistance in the potential users of water to any modernization. In this case, there are no realistic conditions for the successful operation of the irrigation system, so that the construction cannot be recommended in this region. The obtained result demonstrate that one of the reasons for degrading of a large number of the irrigation systems lies perhaps in the fact that no public was consulted in the making of decision to build the systems.

Conclusions The adoption of the Water Framework Directive is the turning point in the development of European water resource. This directive requires that all the water resources institutions of the EU work in a uniform manner, to regularly inform the public, and to have the citizens express their opinion on all the significant water resources plans. In the future, for all water resources systems the prior consent of the representatives of the public will be required (class associations, individuals, NGO sector, users of water). However, very low degree of understanding of water resources problems is present in Serbia. The survey conducted in the municipality of Leskovac demonstrates that a large majority of farmers comprehends the significance of irrigation, but a negligible part of the respondents accepts the fact that the construction of the system inevitably leads to the changes in the agricultural production (new crop composition, modern irrigation methods, and economic price of water). The long-lasting regime that did not respect the logic of economy led to the fact that the greatest majority of the public holds that the state is obliged to provide water to all the users per low, non- economic prices. Water should finally become the economic category in Serbia. Without the economic price of water, there are no conditions for development of any water resources segment. The first task in the application of the WFD in the field of irrigation is the informing of the widest possible interested public with the need of rational usage and protection of water resources. The end user of the irrigation systems should have the realistic picture of the required means for construction and unimpaired operation of the irrigation systems. When the public is better acquainted with the problems, it will be able to help in their solving.

References Bazzani G., Di Pasquale S., Gallerani V. and Viaggi D., 2004: Irrigated agriculture in Italy and water regulation under the EU Water Framework Directive, Water Resource Research, 40 (7) Bazzani G., Di Pasquale S., Gallerani V., Morganti, S., Raggi, M., and Viaggi D., 2005: The sustainability of irrigated agricultural systems under the Water Framework Directive: first results, Environmental Modelling & Software, 20 (2), 165-175 Dodkins, I., Rippey, B., Harrington, T. J., Brtadley, C., Chathain, B. N., Kelly-Quinn, M., McGarrigle, M., Hodge, S., and Trigg, D., 2005: Developing an optimal river typology for biological elements within the Water Framework Directive, Water Research, 39 (15), 3479-3486 Gomez-Limon, J. A. and Riesgo, L., 2005: Irrigation water pricing: differential impacts on irrigated farms, Agricultural Economics, 31 (1), 47-66 Molnar, I. and Stojanovic. N, 1989: Optimization of the harvest plan and degree of soil utilization in irrigation, (in Serbian), Water Resources 21(3-4), 377-386. Kay, D., Wyer, M., Crowther, J., Stapleton, C., Bradford, M., McDonald A., Greaves, J., Francis, C. and Watkins, J., 2005: Predicting faecal indicator fluxes using digital land use data in the UK’s sentinel Water Framework Directive catchment: The Ribble study, Water Research, 39 (16),3967- 3981 Petkovic, S., 2003:.Strategy of irrigation development in Serbia (in Serbian), Water Resources, 35(1- 2), 3-9. Petkovic, S., 2004: Perspectives for development of water sector in Serbia in first decade of XXI century, (in Serbian), Water Resources, 36(3-4), 295-302. Petkovic, S, Ljuljic, B., and Aleksic, A., 2003: “Water Framework Directive and complementary EU directives (in Serbian), Water and sanitary technique, 34(2), 3-16. Potic, O. and Trajkovic, S., 2003: “Estimation of reference evapotranspiration and the irrigation from “Barje” reservoir (in Serbian), Collection of Faculty of Civil Engineering’s Papers 19, 165-174 Tison, J., Park, Y.-S., Coste, M., Wasson, J. G., Ector, L., Rimet, F. and Delmas, F., 2005: Typology of diatom communities and the influence of hydro-ecoregions: A study on the French hydrosystem scale, Water Research, 39 (14), 3177-3188 UN Water World Development Report, 2003: Water for people, water for life Water Framework Directive, 2000: Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of the 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of the water policy, Official Journal of the European Communities, L 327, 1-72.