The European Water Framework Directive (WFD; 2000/60/EC) was incorporated into the Swedish legislation in 2004 through the ordinance Förordningen om förvaltningenav kvaliteten på vattenmiljön (SFS 2004:660). The objective is that all water bodies shall reach a good status by the year 2015. In Sweden the comprehensive plans of the municipalities can play a large role in reaching these goals. A comprehensive plan deals with the long term water and land use of the municipality, which can facilitate an early consideration of water management in the planning process of the municipality. In Sweden five river basin districts have been established in accordance with the Water Framework Directive.

In Sweden, the County Administration board is responsible for improving the water quality in lakes and watercourses according to the European Union Water Framework Directive. In Västmanland county, where river Lillån is situated, the County Administration of Västmanland have the main responsibility for the aquatic environment in that area. The knowledge about the different watercourses in the chatchment of river Lillån is today limited. The aim with this study was to evaluate the ecological quality of River Lillån based on water chemistry analyses and benthic fauna investigations. The aim was also for the benthic fauna to compere different samplingsites and sampling methods with each other in order to see how the species composition changes in the river, and to see the advantages and disadvantages with different sampling tecniques.

The overall aim is to examine how the European Union Water Framework Directive has affected the local water management in the catchment Märstaån situated in the eastern part of the lake Mälaren river basin, Sweden. The first part of the study gives an historical overview of the area with focus on how the old agricultural landscape was handling the nutrient load from farming activities by means of different kinds of wetlands. By using the concept of the procedural landscape, introduced by Torsten Hägerstrand , together with historical maps with dates starting from the 17th century, the pre-modern landscape is analyzed.  The second part is an investigation, based on qualitative data, on how the different actors in the catchment area work together to secure the water quality for the Märstaån river. The analysis shows that the Märstaån catchment river systems are mostly unchanged in the rural areas.  The exception is the mainstream section of the Märstaån river running partly underground today and the Halmsjöbäcken river that is heavily affected by the Arlanda airport situated within the catchment area.

Fresh water has become more and more of a scarce commodity. Water scarcity isn't first and foremost a cause of drought and wasting, but a cause of inequality and mismanagement. This is not only a problem for developing countries, and there can also be variations within countries. The municipality of Gotland has a development program called Vision Gotland 2025, with goals for growth and sustainable development. The aim of this study is to examine whether the use and management of water resources on Gotland and Vision Gotland 2025 is conformed to the Water Framework Directive and the Ecosystem Approach in terms of sustainability.

Uppsats för avläggande av filosofie kandidatexamen iKulturvård, Bebyggelseantikvariskt program15 hpInstitutionen för kulturvårdGöteborgs universitet2015:23.

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD; 2000/60/EC) was incorporated into the Swedish legislation in 2004 through the ordinance Förordningen om förvaltningenav kvaliteten på vattenmiljön (SFS 2004:660). The objective is that all water bodies shall reach a good status by the year 2015. In Sweden the comprehensive plans of the municipalities can play a large role in reaching these goals. A comprehensive plan deals with the long term water and land use of the municipality, which can facilitate an early consideration of water management in the planning process of the municipality. In Sweden five river basin districts have been established in accordance with the Water Framework Directive.

The aim of this paper is to explain and compare non-compliance of two EU-directives, ?the quality of bathing water? and ?the working time directive?. This study answers the questions: Why didn?t Sweden implement the directive on bathing water quality and the working time directive correctly? Are the reasons for non-compliance the same or different in the two cases? The paper is designed as a case study and with an explanatory attempt we explain why the two directives weren?t implemented correctly in Sweden. The theoretical approach is based on both general- and EU-specific implementation theories.

Sweden is a member of the European Union since 1995. The European Union issues directives that cover different areas. Member states must implement these directives into their national legislation. The European council issued in 1993 a directive that took action on the organization of working time, also known as the working time directive. The full name is: Council directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organization of working time.

Sweden is a member of the European Union (EU) since 1995. The association results in considerable proportions of the European law, also called EC-law, for Sweden. The legal system has precedence above Swedish law, which forces our national court to take consideration into and interpret the law in the light of EC-law.Sweden doesn?t possess a general legislation of discrimination. An appointed committee investigates the matter and the requirement of a common law, including all discrimination prohibits.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The management of water resources and waste water varies between the countries of the EU. For many years, a large part of the water in Europe has been contaminated by, among other things, insufficiently treated waste water and emissions from agriculture. The EU Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC and the Urban Waste Water Directive 91/271/EEC are intended to harmonize fresh-water management and waste water management within the whole EU, aiming at safeguarding drinking water of good quality and a high quality of all water within the EU today and in the future. There are however some problems concerning the waste-water directive. One problem is the huge investment needed in Slovakia to fulfil the demands of the waste-water directive for waste-water management in larger communities (with more than 2000 inhabitants).

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.