1 / 6

Reporting «  Costs of measures  » Feedbacks from the Economics WG

This report provides feedback from the Economics Working Group in Brussels on the costs of implementing measures. It explores the costs of the program, how they are financed, and other related issues. The report highlights the importance of using cost reported elsewhere and suggests reporting individual cost types separately.

lowelle
Download Presentation

Reporting «  Costs of measures  » Feedbacks from the Economics WG

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Pierre STROSSER Reporting « Costs of measures »Feedbacks from the Economics WG Brussels, 25 & 26 March, 2014 – WG PoM

  2. The main focus of the cost reporting – a reminder • Two main issues investigated • Q1 - What are the costs of the programme of measures? • Q2 - How are these being financed? • With some “sub-questions” for distinguishing between different cost types, types of measures, “2009-2014” and “2015-2020” ….

  3. General comments from WG Economics • This is a very detailed reporting sheet, which benefits need to be clarified (assessment of the level of effort, difficulties in implementing specific measures, advocacy for funding the water sector) • It is important to make use of cost reported elsewhere (in particular EU reporting on UWWTD) – ensuring that the same “cost framework” is applied elsewhere (WFD as source of inspiration for UWWTD) • Reporting cost-aggregation by sectors is challenging, would require significant effort and clear methodological guidance (e.g. for addressing multi-sector measures). • It is unclear clear whether the same requirements can be applied to the previous cycle: A simpler approach might be more adapted. • Some “space” would be required for addressing "other measures“, in particular measures that aim at improving river’s hydro-morphology.

  4. Suggestions from WG Economics • Reporting individual cost types separately (investments, O&M/annual, other costs) is preferred to reporting “aggregated costs indicators” (e.g. annualised costs). This should be used as guiding principle for reporting costs under other directives. • The added value of providing cost figures disaggregated by sector needs to be better spelled out and justified. If kept in, this will require some methodological guidance and a “simpler approach” to 2009-2014 costs.

  5. Additional feedbacks from experts who attended the WG Economics? • ….

  6. Pierre STROSSER Manythanks for your attention! Brussels, 20 & 21 March, 2014 – WG Economics

More Related