The Danish implementation of the Water Framework Directive has been contested in various courts and the deadline for producing River Basin Management Plans is long overdue. The basis analyses have met heavy critic.
A methodology partial mix of phronetic research on events and discourse analysis has been used to confirm present burning points in the process and uncover what separate stakeholders in order to be able to act upon the burning points and hopefully contribute to an improved planning process.
The process has 6 discourse-coalitions sponsored respectively mainly by 1. Sustainable Agriculture, 2. Danish Agriculture & Food Council, 3. state agencies, 4. academia, 5. Greenpeace and 6. European Commission along with The Danish Society for Nature Conservation. Sustainable Agriculture is not equally included in the process and is most fiercely contesting the authorities. The state agencies have argued for generalized measures, where their consultants in academia have argued for targeted, differentiate measures. It is still unknown what exactly is needed to meet the goals of good ecological status and many water bodies are not designated for measures.
Alternative non-inclusion planning might have flipped the perception of winners and losers 180 degrees and nothing concrete has been offered to substitute reduction in measures.