Traps of multi-level governance. Lessons from the implementation of the Water Framework Directive in Italy

Abstract

Different patterns of multi-level governance (MLG) have increasingly spread across Europe as a consequence of Europeanisation of public policies, aiming to encourage decentralised and participatory procedures conceived as a tool of more effective and accountable policy-making. It appears, however, that the implementation of multi-level policy designs may be rather problematic and does not necessarily lead to the expected performance improvements. Analysing the case of the EU Water Framework Directive, which promotes the creation of particular multi-level governance settings as a means of enacting a new holistic approach to water policies, this article explores the implementation difficulties that the Directive has encountered in Italy, despite some favourable pre-conditions existing in the country. Against such a backdrop, the study draws attention to a number of dimensions which should be further reflected upon in order to improve our understanding of implementation failures of MLG designs in the perspective of the process of Europeanisation.

Keywords:

• Multi-level governance
• Europeanisation
• policy implementation
• water management
• sustainable development

Notes

1. It has been suggested that the normative foundations of MLG are rooted in the following democratic criteria: authorisation, representation and participation on the input side and transparency, responsiveness and accountability on the output side (Piattoni 2010).

2. The principles of sustainable water use formulated in the Directive go hand in hand with the priorities expressed in some key international documents on sustainable development, in particular Agenda 21 (art.18), International Conference on Water and the Environment (ICWE) in 1992, Declarations of the Summit in Johannesburg (2002), World Forum on Water in Kyoto (2003).

3. In particular, the Drinking Water Directive (80/778/EEC) and the Urban Waste Water Treatment (91/271/EEC).

4. The most dreadful floods in terms of economic impact, environmental damage and human victims occurred in Florence in 1966, in Piedmont Region in 1968 and in Genoa in 1970.

5. Some infringement procedures opened by the Commission against Italy in this regard are: Letter of formal notice No 8/11/2000 (SG(2000)D/108243); No 26/6/2002 (C(2002)2329), procedures opened in front of the EU Court of Justice No 2000/5152, No.2002/4801, No.2004/2034).

6. Legislative Decree 152/2006, also known as the ‘Environmental code’, abolished almost all previous Italian laws in the field of water management and protection, comprising Law 183/1989, Law 36/1994 and Legislative Decree 152/1999.

7. The established districts are the following: Alpi Orientali, Padano, Appennino settentrionale, Appennino centrale, Serchio, Appennino meridionale, Sardenia, Sicilia.

8. Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, Ministry of Productive Activities, Ministry of Agriculture and Forests, Ministry of Public Administration, Ministry of Culture.

9. This is true for the following three Districts: the Padano District that covers the territory of Piedmont, Lombardy, Valle d’Aosta, Liguria, Emilia Romagna, Toscana and Veneto; the Appennino Centrale district that comprises Abruzzi, Lazio, Marche, Emilia Romagna, Toscana, Molise, Umbria; the Appennino Meridionale district which extends on the territory of Basilicata, Campania, Calabria, Puglia, Lazio, Abruzzi and Molise.

10. In the position paper presented to the Minister of Environment, the regions clearly expressed their dissatisfaction with the design of both new districts and the related authorities, demanding the opening of institutional consultation on these issues so that the territorial and functional basis of the new system could be more efficiently defined (Rome, 18 April 2007).

11. Later on, APAT was replaced by ISPRA (Institute for research and protection of environment).

12. Ambiguities contained in the art. 117 of Italian Constitution, revised in 2001, caused numerous regional appeals to the Constitutional Court, as far as regional legislative powers in the field of environmental and territorial government are concerned.