Instead, the operator should participate in the coverage of the costs of the new
investments and avoid to recognize and include these costs automatically in
tariffs. In addition, the operator should be required to describe in detail and be
in charge of the investment plans for given periods (financial and tariff
programs included); the Ambit Plan should be only a long-term strategic plan.
In addition, the adoption of the Plans of Water Protection under art. 44 of Law
Decree 152/99, also in view of fulfilling the standards set forth by the
Framework Directive, implies the adoption of programs of measures for the
qualitative-quantitative protection of the water resource which require
investments that would make the increase in tariffs ironically “unsustainable”
from a socio-economic perspective.
In conclusion it can be stated that the application of the “full cost recovery”,
principle as defined by art. 9 of Directive 2000/60/EC, undoubtedly calls for a
full implementation of the tariff reform delineated by the Galli Law, even if
some risks should be taken into account. In the first place, binding this strategy
to completion of the planning and implementation of the actions planned by
the ATOs, should be avoided. At the same time the foundations should be laid
for a consistent and efficient system of economic-financial regulation that
supplements tariff policies with an efficient strategy meant to attract private
investment both though project financing and by involving banks in action
planning, in a real multilevel governance.
It is in this perspective that we can now define the issues, and assume possible
solutions to the implementation challenges encountered in the reform of water
utilities in Campania.
In monitoring the state of enforcement of Community regulations in the field
of water resources in Campania, one can readily infer the fundamental
function of stimulation that has been exerted by the Structural Fund Policy
destined to Regions in view of the transposition of Directive 2000/60/EC.
From a methodological point of view, the absence of an organic national
enforcement discipline has to be observed; as a result, the enforcement of the
Framework Directive depends on the concrete implementation of those actions
instrumental to the attainment of the objectives envisaged by the Directive in
17