12th July 2018 Annex X Application of the bottom- up multicriteria methodology in eight European River Basin District The Vistula RBD Task A3 of the BLUE 2 project “Study on EU integrated policy assessment for the freshwater and marine environment, on the economic benefits of EU water policy and on the costs of its non- implementation” By: Magdalena Trybuch Agnieszka Rogowiec Krzysztof Kochanek In collaboration with Disclaimer: The arguments expressed in this report are solely those of the authors, and do not reflect the opinion of any other party. The report should be cited as follows: Trybuch, Rogowiec, Kochanek (2018). Annex X. Application of the bottom-up multicriteria methodology in eight European River Basin Districts – The Vistula RBD. Deliverable to Task A3 of the BLUE 2 project “Study on EU integrated policy assessment for the freshwater and marine environment, on the economic benefits of EU water policy and on the costs of its non- implementation”. Report to DG ENV. Client: Directorate-General for the Environment of the European Commission. Ramboll Group A/S Hannemanns Allé 53 DK-2300 Copenhagen S Denmark Tel: +45 5161 1000 Fax: +45 5161 1001 Institute for European Environmental Policy London Office 11 Belgrave Road IEEP Offices, Floor 3 London, SW1V 1RB Tel: +44 (0) 20 7799 2244 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7799 2600 Brussels Office Rue Joseph II 36-38, 1000 Bruxelles Tel: +32 (0) 2738 7482 Fax: +32 (0) 2732 4004 Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. 3 Preface ............................................................................................................................. 5 1 Description of the River Basin District Wisła (Vistula) ................................................ 6 2 The Second River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) and the related Programme of Measure (PoM) .............................................................................................................. 10 3 The measures included in the BAU level of effort .................................................... 13 4 The measures included in the HI level of effort ........................................................ 21 5 Costs of the measures included in the BAU level of effort ........................................ 24 6 Costs of the measures included in the HI level of effort ........................................... 27 7 Outcomes of the measures included in the BAU and HI level of effort ...................... 29 8 Benefits of the measures included in the BAU and HI level of effort (a quarter of a page per measure) .................................................................................................................. 31 9 Biodiversity improvements of the measures included in the BAU and HI level of effort 33 10 Comparison of the costs and benefits in the two levels of effort .............................. 34 11 Challenges and recommendations to improve the methodology .............................. 45 12 References .............................................................................................................. 48 13 Annex. Detailed information on costs ...................................................................... 50 List of Tables Table 1 Characterisation of the River Basin District of the River Vistula. ................................. 9 Table 2 Measures in the BAU level of effort ............................................................................ 14 Table 3 Measures in the HI level of effort ............................................................................... 22 Table 4 Costs of the measures included in the BAU level of effort – total funding ................ 26 Table 5 Costs of the measures included in the HI level of effort – total funding .................... 28 Table 6 Summary of the costs in the two levels of effort ........................................................ 35 Table 7 Summary of the outcomes in the two levels of effort ................................................ 37 Table 8 Summary of the benefits in the two levels of effort ................................................... 41 Table 9 Summary of the biodiversity improvements in the two levels of effort .................... 44 Table 10 Costs of the measures included in the BAU level of effort – public funding ............ 50 Table 11 Costs of the measures included in the BAU level of effort – private funding .......... 51 Table 12 Costs of the measures included in the BAU level of effort – other funding ............. 52 List of Figures Figure 1 Overview of the BLUE2 study ...................................................................................... 5 Figure 2 The River Vistula Basin District .................................................................................... 6 Preface This annex report is one product of the “Study on European Union (EU) integrated policy assessment for the freshwater and marine environment, on the economic benefits of EU water policy and on the costs of its non-implementation” (BLUE2) commissioned by the European Commission (EC). The overall aim of the BLUE2 study is to support the Commission in building up its analytical capacity and understanding of the economics and effectiveness of the EU water acquis. BLUE2 is comprised of two parts, as shown in Figure 1: Figure 1 Overview of the BLUE2 study The overall objective of Part A of BLUE2 is to increase the understanding of the full (economic) value that water, and water services generate and how water resources contribute to economic development and citizens' well-being. The findings of BLUE2 will further assist in quantifying how the EU water acquis contributes to this value generation, using the most appropriate valuation techniques. The overall objective of Part B of BLUE2 is to develop a method for the integrated socio- economic assessment of policies affecting the quality of the freshwater and marine environment, to be applied in connection with the water and marine modelling framework held by the Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC). The method and accompanying tools will be used to support policy development. In particular, Part B aims to establish an EU pressures inventory and measures database. Additionally, Part B will increase the understanding of the cost-effectiveness of measures and the benefits arising from a reduction of pressures on the freshwater and marine environment through the application of two online modelling tools. A Scenario Generation Tool for defining and generating policy scenarios for JRC modelling and an Evaluation Tool for cost-benefit assessment of the created scenarios. Task A3 of BLUE2 developed a bottom-up multicriteria methodology to compare costs and benefits of water policy at the River Basin District level. This annex summarises the results of the application of the methodology developed in Task A3 to the Vistula RBD. 1 Description of the River Basin District Wisła (Vistula) Figure 2 The River Vistula Basin District Overall description of the RBD The River Vistula (Pol. Wisła) basin district (RVBD) is the largest catchment in Poland with an area of 183,176 km2 (whose 87.5% in Poland). It covers nearly 60% of the whole area of the country. The sources of the main River Vistula are located on the slope of the Barania Góra mountain in Beskid Śląski and the mouth of the river is in the Zatoka Gdańska (Baltic Sea). Due to its large area, the RVBD covers several administrative units in Eastern Poland, these are Voivodships (from south to north – along the River Vistula course): śląskie, małopolskie, podkarpackie, lubelskie, świętokrzyskie, łódzkie, mazowieckie, podlaskie, warmińsko-mazurskie, kujawsko- pomorskie, pomorskie, i.e. 11 out of all 16 Voivodships in Poland. It terms of geographical variability, the RVBD covers three physio-geographical units: Subcarpatian Region, Eastern Europe without Alpian regions and Eastern European lowlands. It means that the RVBD is of mountainous character in its southern part (approximately up to Dunajec tributary), which later changes into highland character (approximately up to the River San tributary) and finally lowland rivers catchment up to the River Vistula mouth. The most important left tributaries of the River Vistula are: Przemsza, Nida, Czarna, Kamienna, Iłżanka, Radomka, Pilica, Bzura, Brda, Wda, and Wierzyca, whereas the right tributaries are: Soła, Skawa, Raba, Dunajec, Wisłoka, San, Wieprz, Świder, Narew, Skrwa, Drwęca, Osa and Liwa. The significant discharges of the River Vistula and frequent inundations lead to the building of several artificial reservoirs that mostly play flow-regulating, fresh-water supplying and power- generating roles; the biggest artificial reservoirs are Wisła-Czarne, Goczałkowice and Włocławek. Within the RVBD there are: 2,660 rivers, 6 near-sea rivers, 5 channels, 484 lakes and 94 groundwater water reservoirs. The population in the RVBD reaches 24.5 million inhabitants. The most important Polish cities with regards to their cultural heritage and economic significance are located in the area of the River Vistula Catchment, including: Kraków (population: 766,739 in 2017), Katowice (population: 297,177 in 2017), Lublin (population: 340,230 in 2017), Warszawa (population: 1,758,143 in 2017), Białystok (population: 296,628 in 2017), Toruń (population: 202,591 in 2017), Bydgoszcz (population: 353,215 in 2017) and Gdańsk (population: 464,293 in 2017). It is estimated that 64% of the RVBD area