In both Sweden and Finland, water law has traditionally provided strong protection for hydropower operations by issuing permanent environmental licences. This national protection has started to erode as a result of the requirement of the European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive (WFD) for permit reviews to improve the ecological status of rivers. In the light of this dynamic between European and national frameworks, this article compares the Swedish and Finnish implementation of the WFD regarding existing hydropower operations. Whereas Sweden has adopted comprehensive legislative and policy reforms that embrace a systemic perspective on reconciling hydropower with the current societal and ecological circumstances, Finland has relied on bottom-up collaborative processes at the grassroots level. The article shows that both approaches are problematic in so far as they push the boundaries of proper implementation of the WFD and, by extension, the achievement of the ecological objectives of the WFD in waters affected by hydropower. Our comparison highlights tensions between EU law requirements for formal legal effectiveness in national implementation, and the WFD's aspirations for adaptive river basin-based governance.

在瑞典和芬兰，水法传统上通过颁发永久环境许可证为水电运营提供强有力的保护。由于欧盟 (EU) 水框架指令 (WFD) 要求进行许可证审查以改善河流的生态状况，这种国家保护已开始受到削弱。鉴于欧洲和国家框架之间的这种动态，本文比较了瑞典和芬兰在现有水电运营方面实施 WFD 的情况。瑞典采取了全面的立法和政策改革，从系统角度协调水电与当前的社会和生态环境，而芬兰则依赖于基层自下而上的协作进程。文章表明，这两种方法都存在问题，因为它们突破了 WFD 正确实施的界限，并进一步扩大了在受水电影响的水域实现 WFD 生态目标的范围。我们的比较凸显了欧盟法律对国家实施中正式法律效力的要求与 WFD 对基于流域的适应性治理的愿望之间的紧张关系。