Experiences of uncertainty : Case study of the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive in Sweden

Abstract: The Water Framework Directive (WFD, 2000/60/EC) was introduced in 2000. In implementing the WFD in Sweden expert knowledge in areas relating to the WFD was much needed resulting in establishment of national water management authorities, as the five water authorities, boarded in appointed county administrative boards across the country. As much noted in literature, uncertainties appear when implementing the WFD. Previous literature,with the exception of e.g. Raadgever et al (2011), Brugnach et al (2008) and Sigel et al (2007 and2010), has not put much focus on the types of uncertainty experienced by water management officials working with the implementation of the WFD on a daily basis. There are also few studies in Sweden, such as Gipperth & Elmgren (2010), Hammer et al (2011) and Entson & Gipperth(2010), touching upon the subject although not entirely focusing on practical experiences of uncertainty. Therefore, the aim of this study is to reveal the types of uncertainties experienced by water management officials from: SMHI, the county administrative board in Östergötland and Bothnia Bay, the water authority in the Southern Baltic Sea district, the Northern Baltic Sea and the North Sea, as well as the SEPA. In analysing the empirical data, six types of uncertainties emerged. They showed that water management officials experienced uncertainties in interpreting the WFD e.g. recommendation and manuals from supervisory authorities, measurement techniques, the typology of water bodies, what methods to use in e.g. assessments, knowing the effects of action programmes and lack of data ordata deficiency. In combating these uncertainties, the water management officials used communication as an strategy. Furthermore, responsibility in pointing out uncertainties and ways of reducing uncertainties was also seen as ways of handling uncertainties.