Competing Integration Principles in a Decentralising State

The chapter deals with two case studies – the Idro Lake and the Marecchia water basin – that show the consequences of the adoption of two different integration principles to the issue of water management. The first integration principle promotes integration at the scale of the river basin, is mostly concerned with the issue of water quantity and is represented by law 189/1989, instituting the Basin Authorities. In the case of Idro lake the regime was quite successful in solving, at least provisionally, most of the conflicts/rivalries about the use of water for different functions (irrigation, hydropower production, tourism and amenities) at the same time generating a more sustainable use of the water (introduction of the minimum vital flow in the downstream river). The second case study is an example of a different integration principle, the one introduced by law 36/1994, at the scale of water supply and purification and based on the notion of water as a commodity and of integrated water service. The evidence shows that on the one hand the two integration principles are potentially in conflict with each other, that in any case local authorities have too many roles to play at the same time, and that in any case the outcomes in the Marecchia case are rather disappointing from the environmental point of view as neither the quality of water has improved nor its use has become more sustainable. The lessons that can be drawn are very relevant for policy research as they show how unless the environmental dimension is directly represented by some actor in the governance system, and unless this is reinforced by some organisational or procedural institutional arrangement, the mere integration is not sufficient to achieve better sustainability. And in order to increase multi-level and multi-actor cooperation some specific incentives (not necessarily of the monetary nature) are in any case needed.