Agricultural water law enacted in 2026

The law on agricultural protection and sovereignty (Upsa), enacted on August 18, 2026, establishes access to water as a fundamental condition for French agriculture. It encourages water storage, simplifies procedures, and grants more influence to agricultural interests in water management. However, it does not challenge the principle of balanced and sustainable water management outlined in the Environment Code.

Agriculture faces economic and climate challenges

French agriculture is experiencing a crisis of income and competitiveness, with the gross surplus of agricultural holdings decreasing by 25.7% in 2023 and again by 9.4% in 2024. Climate change, especially severe droughts in France during the summer of 2026, has worsened the situation, making irrigation increasingly vital for crops and livestock. However, water resources are also under stress, with quality and quantity declining due to human pressures.

Law aims to increase water supply for agriculture

The law seeks to protect agricultural use of water by focusing on increasing supply to meet demand. It sets goals such as doubling agricultural storage volumes by 2035 and increasing the reuse of treated wastewater. However, these goals are not binding, and the Constitutional Council has emphasized that they must align with existing environmental protection rules.

No priority given to irrigation over environmental needs

The law states that there is no general hierarchy between economic and environmental water uses, requiring them to be reconciled. The Environment Code continues to take precedence over health, sanitation, and drinking water needs. Thus, storing more water does not automatically mean using more, as environmental protections remain in place.

Storage as a response to climate challenges

The law presents water storage as a key solution to climate-related water shortages, suggesting that storing water during abundant periods can be used during droughts. While this approach is simple, it is not the only solution, and critics argue that the law does not consider other strategies or the broader context of agricultural and environmental needs.

Scientific and practical challenges remain

Hydrological studies suggest that winter water volumes could help restore balance, but only under specific conditions such as prioritizing surface water and setting protective thresholds. The law does not fully address these conditions, and the debate over storage often oversimplifies the issue, ignoring the nuanced realities of water management.

Key questions remain unanswered

The law leaves several critical questions unresolved, such as what water to store, by whom, for what crops, and with what public funding. These issues are left to a draft document known as the territorial project for water management (PTGE), which is still being developed.

PTGE gains new power in water governance

The PTGE, previously a purely organizational tool, now has increased authority due to the agricultural emergency law. It allows for the adaptation of water uses based on available resources and agricultural needs. When a storage project is included in a PTGE, related planning documents must be revised, potentially altering existing water management frameworks.

Reforms target water management organizations

The law calls for unique collective management organizations (OUGC) to review their practices, ensuring non-discriminatory access to water and publishing annual reports on withdrawals. However, the vague nature of these requirements may limit their effectiveness in guiding agricultural practices.

Water management plans must adapt

The law requires the aménagement and water management plan (SAGE) and the direct aménagement and water management plan (SDAGE) to reduce their environmental focus and incorporate storage needs. This reduces the normative power of these plans, allowing for more flexibility in agricultural water use.

Scientific studies must now prioritize agriculture

The HMUC studies, which previously focused on environmental and hydrological factors, now must also consider agricultural storage needs. This change may delay and weaken the determination of water withdrawal volumes, blurring the line between scientific expertise and political decisions.

Agriculture gains more influence in water governance

The law strengthens agricultural representation in local water committees (CLE), where farmers now have at least one-third of the seats in the users' college. A technical commission focused on agricultural uses, led by a farmer, is also required within the CLE.

Law raises questions about effectiveness and balance

While the law shifts water management in favor of agriculture, it does not eliminate the principle of sustainable and shared resource management. The judge will continue to have authority to reject projects incompatible with water preservation. However, the law may not fully address the complex challenges facing agriculture, leaving many questions about its long-term effectiveness.