Pushing Water Uphill? Ambiguity and Conflict in Navigating the Implementation of Water Governance Reform in Ireland

Clean water and reliable access to it is essential for public health and how to manage this critical resource is a significant challenge for environmental policy. European citizens are generally aware of the seriousness of water quality and quantity (Eurobarometer, 2012) and have actively voiced their concerns regarding the right to access water and their resistance to the commodification of water services (Bieler, 2017; Right2Water.eu). Perhaps less visible in the public domain is the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2000/60/EC which addresses the ambitious aim of integrating European water legislation into an overarching strategy to attain ‘good water status’ across the EU. The directive is instrumental in driving reforms in water governance across European countries, yet meeting its systemic objectives and addressing its broad principles is a multi-faceted implementation challenge (Vouloulis et al, 2017), demanding a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches in its practical implementation. This paper discusses water governance reform in Ireland which encompasses efforts to translate the WFD into action. The reforms are set against an historical legacy of inadequate infrastructure and an institutionally fragmented approach to water governance. Matland’s (1995) integrated model of implementation is used to explore how top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation processes can be reconciled to structure and inform the role that ambiguity and conflict play in policy reform. Arguably, the Irish case is characterised by low policy ambiguity and high policy conflict whereby the delivery of good quality water is a clearly defined goal but is expensive to deliver, and conflictual battles have arisen over means and infrastructural decisions. Central to these reforms is the creation of a single utility and a single national river basin. Meeting the requirements of EU legislation and public demand, however, involves significant investment, scientific expertise, monitoring, and public participation. In addition, the recognition and interpretation of the ‘polluter pays’ principle and addressing the significance of full cost recovery has provoked major controversy in Ireland with respect to the introduction (and removal) of domestic water charges.