What is the status of the transposition of the directive into country/ Case Study law?

Scoring, scale 1 to 6:
1 - Development not started or delayed in most subnational jurisdictions
6 - Objectives consistently achieved by all authorities, and periodically reviewed and revised

What is the status of the allocation of responsibilities for strategic planning under this directive? Distinguish the different scales: national, regional, river basin, catchment level, farm level.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - No obvious demarcation of roles and responsibilities
6 - Roles and responsibilities very clearly demarcated with no overlaps

What is the status of the allocation of responsibilities for policy implementation for this directive? Distinguish the different scales: national, regional, river basin, catchment level, farm level.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - No obvious demarcation of roles and responsibilities
6 - Roles and responsibilities very clearly demarcated with no overlaps

What is the status of coordination and the collaboration between government authorities and agencies in relevant sectors? Distinguish the different scales: national, regional, river basin, catchment level, farm level.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - Development not started or not progressing
6 - Objectives consistently achieved and periodically reviewed and revised

Which coordination tools for policy coherence are relevant to horizontal collaboration in water policy making? Distinguish for river basin organisation/agencies, regulations for sharing roles between Actors, co-ordination agency or commission, contractual arrangements, intermediate bodies or actors, financial transfers or incentives

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - Development not started or not progressing
6 - Objectives consistently achieved and periodically reviewed and revised

What are the most frequent obstacles to effective horizontal collaboration between different authorities and agencies? Distinguish for overlapping, unclear, non-existing allocation of responsibilities, intensive competition between different ministries, interference of lobby groups, absence of common information and frame of reference for policy makers, lack of high political commitment and leadership in water policy, lack of institutional incentives for co-operation, lack of staff and time, lack of technical capabilities, difficult implementation of federal government decisions at local and regional level, absence of strategic planning and sequencing of decisions, absence of monitoring and evaluation of the outcome of national/regional legislation, contradiction between national agencies and supranational recommendations/directives, lack of citizens concern on water policy.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - Highly obstructive to coordination between different administrative agencies/entities
6 - Highly collaborative and effective coordination between different administrative agencies/entities

What is the status of management instruments used to support drinking water pollution control? Distinguish the different scales: national, regional, river basin, catchment level, farm level.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - No management instruments being implemented
6 - Management instruments are implemented on a long term basis, with excellent coverage across sectors and the country and are highly effective

Is there a mechanism for ensuring policies are set at the appropriate geographic scale? For example, between hydrological boundaries and administrative boundaries.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - There are issues and no mechanisms in place
6 - All required mechanisms for bridging scales of governance have been recognised and implemented by the majority of authorities

What is the status of management instruments used to support implementing of water quality monitoring? Distinguish the different scales: national, regional, river basin, catchment level, farm level.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - No monitoring systems in place
6 - Long-term monitoring is carried out with excellent coverage and excellent use by stakeholders

How important are the below performance indicators in monitoring and evaluating policy? Distinguish environmental, social, economic, citizen indicators.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - No monitoring systems in place
6 - Long-term monitoring is carried out with excellent coverage and excellent use by stakeholders

What is the status of the framework for transboundary water management for the most important basins?

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - Development not started or not progressing
6 - Objectives consistently achieved and periodically reviewed and revised

What is the current status for the transboundary data and information between countries?

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - Development not started or not progressing
6 - Objectives consistently achieved and periodically reviewed and revised

What are the current levels of public participation at each level of governance below? Distinguish the different scales: national, regional, river basin, catchment level, farm level.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - No communication between government and stakeholders on policy, planning and management
6 - Representation: Formal representation of stakeholders in government stakeholders in government processes contributing to decision making on important issues and activities, as appropriate

What is the current status for data and information sharing with each level below? Distinguish the different scales: national, regional, river basin, catchment level, farm level.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - No data and information sharing
6 - All relevant data and information are online and freely accessible to all

Which coordination tools for policy coherence are relevant to horizontal collaboration in water policy governance? Distinguish multi-sectoral conferences between central governments, platforms for sharing information between industry experts, inter-agency programme (two or more organisations working together).

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - Development not started or progressing
6 - Being used by authorities and consistently achieved, and periodically reviewed and revised

What are the most frequent obstacles for effective vertical co-ordination across different levels of governance? Distinguish lack of consistency in information exchange between groups in vertical coordination, fragmentation of water governance, disproportionate funding impacting the effectiveness of water governance, insufficient technical knowledge, infrastructure undermining the implementation capacities of local actors.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - Obstacle blocking effective coordination
6 - Strategies to manage obstacles are in place, working and periodically reviewed and revised

What is the status for the authorities' resource (people/ finance/ infrastructure) for leading governance of water policy measures? Distinguish the different scales: national, regional, river basin, catchment level, farm level.

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - No dedicated government authorities to lead
6 - Authorities have the capacity to effectively lead periodic revisions

Which broad governance measures have been adopted to build capacity to deliver water policy measures? Distinguish collaboration with the private sector, financial incentives, performance indicators and targets holding local government accountable, citizen participation, involvement in civil society organisation, data bases (sharing information).

Scoring scale 1 to 6:
1 - Development of measures started or not progressing
6 - Measures in place and consistently used and periodically reviewed and revised