20.10.2014 Views

Europe - UNEP

Europe - UNEP

Europe - UNEP

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Rudesheim, Rhine River, Germany. Photo credit: Sandra Arbogast.<br />

national and transboundary waters, it has been<br />

just as influential in promoting cooperation over<br />

transboundary waters in <strong>Europe</strong>. Through a<br />

combination of key principles, such as achieving<br />

good water status in all EU waters by 2015, and<br />

detailed procedural rules, such as the production<br />

of river basin management plans, the EU WFD is<br />

set to bring about significant changes to the way<br />

water is managed within <strong>Europe</strong>. Even beyond<br />

the EU region, e.g., in the Dnieper basin, the EU<br />

WFD has influenced the negotiation of basinwide<br />

legal agreements. Moreover, through its<br />

institutional structure the EU is well placed to<br />

address pressing challenges within <strong>Europe</strong>an<br />

water resource management, such as flood<br />

management and the protection of groundwater.<br />

Despite such positive trends in institutional<br />

capacity building within <strong>Europe</strong>, from an issuebased<br />

perspective, chapter four highlighted a<br />

number of areas where the institutional capacity<br />

for the management of transboundary waters<br />

could be strengthened. On a positive note, treaty<br />

law shows that <strong>Europe</strong>an countries have<br />

endorsed the substantive rule of equitable and<br />

reasonable utilisation, and also the duty to take<br />

all appropriate measures to prevent, control and<br />

reduce transboundary impact. However,<br />

establishing the practical procedural rules and<br />

mechanisms that effectively and efficiently<br />

implement the latter substantive rules has proved<br />

to be more problematic. The analysis in chapter<br />

four showed that in certain areas such as<br />

monitoring and assessment, public participation,<br />

and compliance, there were clear gaps within<br />

existing agreements. In addition, little work has<br />

been done in assessing the effectiveness of such<br />

agreements in accordance with their aims and<br />

objectives as more emphasis has been placed on<br />

ensuring compliance with international<br />

agreements. Measuring the effectiveness of<br />

international agreements is strongly dependent<br />

on there being sufficient data of a suitable<br />

standard to evaluate the key joint management<br />

issues within the basin. Similarly public<br />

participation and appropriate compliance<br />

strategies can go a long way to ensuring that<br />

basin-agreements are both implemented and<br />

effective. Useful guidance on how countries can<br />

develop these aspects of water resource<br />

management can be found within the UNECE<br />

and EU framework. However, in many cases lack<br />

of financial resources and the absence of<br />

capacity development measures will be major<br />

impediments to strengthening basin agreements.<br />

This issue thus highlights the role that<br />

international donors should take in developing<br />

basin-wide agreements; a role that has been<br />

clearly illustrated within the case studies and list<br />

of international projects.<br />

Chapter 6. Conclusion — 83

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!