222893e
222893e
222893e
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
FREE FLOWREACHING WATER SECURITY THROUGH COOPERATIONUNESCOPublishingUnited NationsEducational, Scientific andCultural Organization
FREE FLOWREACHING WATER SECURITY THROUGH COOPERATIONUNESCOPublishingUnited NationsCultural Organization
DISCLAIMERThe designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply theexpression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country,territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarilythose of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.ISBN 978-92-3-104256-0Original title: Free Flow - Reaching Water Security Through CooperationText © UNESCO 2013. All rights reserved.Photographs © as per creditsPublished in 2013 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, Franceand Co-publisher Tudor Rose www.tudor-rose.co.ukUNESCOPublishingUnited NationsCultural Organization
AcknowledgementsCompiled by: Sean Nicklin, Ben CornwellEdited by: Dr Jacqui Griffiths and Rebecca LambertDesigned by: Libby Sidebotham and Paul RobinsonProject Manager: Stuart FairbrotherPublication of this book was made possible by: Blanca Jimenez Cisneros, Miguel de França Doria and Alexander Otte at UNESCO-IHPCover design: Libby SidebothamCover image: Tânia Brito, HidroEXPrinted in the UK by: Butler, Tanner and DennisWith thanks to all the authors listed in the contents section for their support in making Free Flow possible.Aarhus WaterAfrican Development BankAsia Pacific Centre for Ecohydrology (APCE)Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID)Australian Centre for Sustainable CatchmentsBlack & Veatch CorporationCenter for Eco-Smart Waterworks System, Yonsei UniversityCentre for the Sustainable Management of Water Resources in theCaribbean Island States (CEHICA)Centre for Water Sensitive Cities, Monash UniversityCzech Hydrometeorological InstituteDisaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI)Dundee Centre for Water Law, Policy and ScienceEnvironment Agency (EAD), United Arab EmiratesEuropean Regional Centre for Ecohydrology (ERCE)Federal Institute of Hydrology (BfG), GermanyFEMSA FoundationGlobal Water Partnership (GWP)Global Water System Project (GWSP)HidroEXInter-American Development BankInternational Association for Water Law (AIDA)International Center for Agricultural Research In Dry Areas (ICARDA)International Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA)International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD)International Centre on Hydroinformatics (CIH)International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics(ICRISAT)International Groundwater Centre (IGRAC)International Network of Basin Organizations (INBO)International Water Management Institute (IWMI)International Water Resources Association (IWRA)Irkutsk State UniversityJaroslav erni Institute for the Development of Water Resources (JCI)Korea Environment Institute (KEI)Korea Water Forum (KWF)Korea Water Resources Association (KWRA)Mekong River Commission (MRC)Mexican Institute of Water TechnologyMinistry for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of HungaryMinistry of Foreign Affairs, the NetherlandsMinistry of Mines, Energy and Water Development (MMEWD), ZambiaMinistry of Water Resources and Irrigation, EgyptMinistry of Water Resources, General Water Authority (GWA), LibyaMurray Darling Basin Authority (MDBA)National Centre for Groundwater Research and Training, AustraliaNational Hydraulic Research Institute of Malaysia (NAHRIM)National Institute of Hydrology, IndiaNational Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA),New ZealandNational Water Agency of Brazil (ANA)National Water Commission, AustraliaNational Water Resources Institute (NWRI), NigeriaNile Basin Initiative Secretariat (NBI)Oxyo-WaterPatel School of Global Sustainability, University of South FloridaPrince Sultan Bin Abdulaziz International Prize for Water (PSIPW)Project WET FoundationPublic Utilities Board (PUB), SingaporeResearch Center for Water Policy and Economy, K-Water Research InstituteStockholm International Water Institute (SIWI)Suez EnvironnementUniversiti Sains Malaysia (USM)University of Belgrade, Faculty of Civil Engineering in BelgradeUniversity of LeicesterUN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC)Water Center for Arid and Semi-Arid Zones in Latin America and theCaribbean (CAZALAC)Water.org[ 3 ]
ForewordIRINA BOKOVA, DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF UNESCOIn this International Year for Water Cooperation, our position is clear. Water is the basic ingredient of life and afundamental human right. Water is the common denominator of many global challenges – in health, farming,energy, and urban development. It can be the common solution also, holding the key to global sustainability –but this requires deeper commitment from all of us. Cooperation around water, for water and through water, musthappen everywhere – between States and within them. This is more than a technical or scientific issue. Watercooperation is about fighting poverty and hunger, and protecting the environment. It is about saving children fromdisease. It is about allowing girls to go to school instead of walking kilometres to fetch water. It is about providingwomen and men with access to sanitation, wherever they live. Fundamentally, it is about peace, on the basis ofdialogue between States and across regions. When we talk about water security, we are really talking about humanrights and human dignity, about the sustainable development of all societies.Water cooperation demands changes of attitude, a transformation in the way we use water and view our interests,and an evolution in the way we govern the management of this essential resource. This can only be nurtured throughdialogue and mutual understanding, in order to create a solid basis of trust. These goals have always guided theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in its work through water diplomacy tohelp countries engage in the complex tasks of conflict resolution, mediation and water education for peace.The same spirit underpins the International Year of Water Cooperation, designated by the United NationsGeneral Assembly to raise the profile of water security on the agenda of world leaders, water professionals, theprivate sector as well as the wider public. This initiative builds on the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment andDevelopment, the 2000 Millennium Declaration as well as the International Decade for Action, Water for Life(2005-2015), and it will contribute to setting an ambitious global development agenda to follow 2015.The 31 agencies of UN-Water chose UNESCO to coordinate the International Year of Water Cooperation,placing the organization at the forefront of a global partnership for water security. This draws on UNESCO’slong-standing experience in cross-sectoral approaches to building water cooperation and a unique ‘water family’including UNESCO water-related centres, university chairs and global networks. With our partners in UN-Water,we are reaching out to civil society and the private sector to foster scientific and technical collaboration, to raiseawareness, to develop capacities and to share good practices.This publication, Free Flow: Reaching Water Security through Cooperation, bears testimony to our collectivecommitment to foster a lasting culture of cooperation among water practitioners, scientists and policymakers. Iwish to thank our publishing partner, Tudor Rose, all members of the UNESCO ‘water family’ and all contributors,who helped to make this book possible. I am certain it will inspire many readers and guide us all forward.Image: © UNESCO/Michel RavassardIrina BokovaDirector-General of UNESCO[ 4 ]
PrefaceMICHEL JARRAUD, CHAIR OF UN-WATER AND SECRETARY-GENERALOF THE WORLD METEOROLOGICAL ORGANIZATION (WMO)Water is a shared resource on which life, the environment and most human activities depend.Our planet has some 276 transboundary basins and as many transboundary aquifers, and 148 countriesshare at least one basin with others. In many areas, water withdrawals are already exceeding the rechargecapacity of the environment, and water availability is decreasing. Up to 90 per cent of wastewater indeveloping countries flows untreated into the environment, threatening health, food security, and access tosafe drinking and bathing water.In recent decades, competition for water has increased sharply due to growing demands to satisfythe needs of a growing population, while the resource appears to be scarcer in many areas. The globalpopulation is expected to grow from a little over 7 billion today to 8 billion by 2025, with waterwithdrawals increasing by half in developing countries and by 18 per cent in developed countries. At thesame time, increasing variability in precipitation and an expected increase in droughts mean that, by the2070s, the number of people affected by drought is expected to rise from 28 million to 44 million.Water has rarely been the root of conflicts, but it can be an exacerbating factor where social and politicaltensions already exist. The interests of farmers, domestic users, hydropower generators, recreational users andecosystems are often at odds regarding water, and international boundaries make the situation even more complex.But while transboundary cooperation has often been difficult, experience has shown that sharing aresource as precious as water can be a catalyst for cooperation rather than conflicts. Across the world,hundreds of treaties have been signed between riparian states and the institutions created to manage anduse transboundary waters in an equitable and sustainable manner. These agreements have often broughtconcrete social, economic and political benefits to countries and their populations.By declaring 2013 the International Year of Water Cooperation, the United Nations General Assemblyrecognizes the broad benefits of cooperation in the water domain for achieving the MillenniumDevelopment Goals. That cooperation also plays an important role in contributing to the realisation of thehuman right to safe drinking water and adequate sanitation for all.The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization has partnered with Tudor Rose topublish Free Flow, bringing together a broad range of water professionals and stakeholders to share theirknowledge and experiences. The chapters in this book reflect the progress and challenges encountered inthe fields of water management and cooperation around the world. I am confident that they will add tothe growing body of evidence on the benefits of water cooperation and provide valuable insight into theexperiences and practices that can make it a reality.Michel JarraudChair of UN-WaterSecretary-General of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)[ 5 ]
ContentsAcknowledgements ............................................................................3Foreword by Irina Bokova, Director-General, United NationsEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organization ..............................4Preface by Michel Jarraud, Chair of UN-Water andSecretary-General, World Meteorological Organization (WMO) .........5Statement by Mr János Áder, President of the Republic of Hungary .10Statement by Mr Emomali Rahmon, President of theRepublic of Tajikistan .....................................................................11Water security through science-based cooperation: UNESCO’sInternational Hydrological Programme ...........................................12Blanca Jiménez-Cisneros, Alexander Otte, Miguel de França Doria, GiuseppeArduino, Léna Salamé, Siegfried Demuth, Anil Mishra, Alice AureliIWATER DIPLOMACYTransboundary water cooperation ....................................................20Nick Bonvoisin, Secretary to the Convention on the Protection and Use ofTransboundary Waters and International Lakes, and Co-Secretary to its Protocol onWater and Health, United Nations Economic Commission for EuropeGreater cooperation through water diplomacy and transboundarywater management ..........................................................................24Julia Marton-Lefèvre, Patrick MacQuarrie, Alejandro Iza and Mark Smith,International Union for Conservation of NatureFrom the Dead Sea to an Israel/Palestine Water Accord:20 years of water diplomacy in the Middle East ...............................28Gidon Bromberg, Nader Khateeb and Munqeth Mehyar, Co-Directors, EcoPeace/Friends of the Earth Middle EastTransboundary water diplomacy in the Mekong region ...................31Dr John Dore, Senior Regional Water Resources Sector Specialist, Australian Agencyfor International Development, Laos; and Dr Louis Lebel, Director, Unit for Socialand Environmental Research, Chiang Mai University, ThailandThe Nile Basin Initiative: advancing transboundary cooperationand supporting riparian communities ..............................................35Abdulkarim H. Seid, Wubalem Fekade, Emmanuel Olet, Nile Basin InitiativeIITRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTCooperation over transboundary aquifers: lessons learnedfrom 10 years of experience ............................................................40Kirstin I. Conti, PhD Fellow, International Groundwater Resources Assessment CentreSustaining transboundary water management by investing incommunity cooperation ..................................................................45Benjamin Noury, Associate Director, Oxyo WaterTransboundary water management – why it is important andwhy it needs to be developed ..........................................................49Anders Jägerskog, Stockholm International Water Institute and United NationsDevelopment Programme Shared Waters PartnershipCooperation on small rivers can make a difference ..........................53Jeff Smith for the International Water Management InstituteEfficient and effective cooperation in the River Rhine catchment .....57Dr J. Cullman, Federal Institute of Hydrology, Germany and Chairperson of UNESCOInternational Hydrology Programme; Eric Sprokkereef and Ute Menke, Ministry ofInfrastructure and Environment, Rijkswaterstaat-CHR Secretariat, The NetherlandsSharing water in Australia: a collaborative endeavour ......................61James Cameron, CEO, National Water Commission, AustraliaRegional water cooperation in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region ...65Arun B. Shrestha, Shahriar M. Wahid, Ramesh A. Vaidya, Mandira S. Shrestha andDavid J. Molden, International Centre for Integrated Mountain DevelopmentThe Mekong River Basin: practical experiences in transboundarywater management ..........................................................................70Hans Guttman, Chief Executive Officer, Mekong River Commission SecretariatParticipation in the management of the Niger, Senegal and Congoriver basins ......................................................................................74Christophe Brachet and Daniel Valensuela, Deputy Secretaries, International Networkof Basin OrganizationsThe Murray–Darling Basin Plan: cooperation in transboundarywater management .........................................................................77Kerryn Molloy, Senior Science Writer, Murray–Darling Basin AuthorityMankind on the shores of the Baikal: the transboundary ecosystemof Russia and Mongolia ...................................................................81E. I. Lishtovannii and A. N. Matveev, Irkutsk State University, Russia; B. Bayartogtokh,Mongolian State University; and T. Villemin, University of Savoie, FranceLibya’s experience in the management of transboundary aquifers ....85Omar Salem, Senior Hydrogeologist, General Water Authority – Ministry of WaterResources, LibyaTransboundary groundwater resources management implementedin the Kumamoto region of Japan ...................................................88Tadashi Tanaka, Department of International Affairs, University of Tsukuba, JapanTransboundary water management in the Zambezi and Congoriver basins: a situation analysis .......................................................92Ngosa Howard Mpamba, Assistant Director, Water Resources Management andChristopher Chileshe, Director, Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development,Department of Water Affairs, ZambiaInteractive open source information systems for fosteringtransboundary water cooperation ....................................................96J. Ganoulis, Coordinator and Ch. Skoulikaris, Secretary, United NationsEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Chair/International Network ofWater-Environment Centres for the Balkans[ 6 ]
ContentsIIIWATER EDUCATION ANDINSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTCapacity development for water cooperation .................................100Dr Reza Ardakanian and Lis Mullin Bernhardt, UN-Water Decade Programme onCapacity DevelopmentCoping with extreme weather and water-related disasters ..............103Kaoru Takara, Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University, JapanThe Regional Centre for Training and Water Studies of Aridand Semi-arid Zones .....................................................................107Gamal Shaker, General Manager, Regional Department and Rasha El Gohary,Associate Professor, Development and Monitoring Department, Training and HumanDevelopment Sector, Ministry of Water Resources and IrrigationSustainable water education as a solution to globalwater challenges ............................................................................111Yoonjin Kim, Project Manager, International Affairs, Korea Water ForumLong-term planning investments paying dividends: the ColoradoRiver Basin Water Supply and Demand Study ................................115Carly Jerla, Co-Study Manager and Ken Nowak, Bureau of Reclamation; KayBrothers, Co-Study Manager, Southern Nevada Water Authority consultant; ArminMunevar, CH2M Hill; Les Lampe, Black & Veatch; David Groves and JordanFischbach, RAND CorporationHidroEX International Centre – an example ofwater cooperation .........................................................................119Tânia Brito, Director of Research, Richard Meganck, Romes Lopes,HidroEX International CentreApplication of water directives in small settlements ......................123Professor Jovan Despotovic, University of Belgrade Faculty of Civil Engineering andSerbian National Committee for the United Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization International Hydrological Programme; and Ljiljana Jankovic,CEng, University of Belgrade Faculty of Civil EngineeringFrom China to Uganda: educating and empowering peopleto take action .................................................................................126Dennis Nelson, President and CEO; John Etgen, Senior Vice President;Nicole Rosenleaf Ritter, Communications Manager, Project WET FoundationSpeaking so that people understand: integrated water resourcesmanagement in Guatemala ...........................................................130Joram Gil, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural OrganizationChair in Sustainable Water Resources, GuatemalaIntegrated water resources management in Peru throughshared vision planning ...................................................................136Guillermo Mendoza and Hal Cardwell, International Center for Integrated WaterResources Management, Institute for Water Resources of the US Army Corps ofEngineers; and Pedro Guerrero, Project for Modernization of Water ResourcesManagement, National Water Authority of Peru, Ministry of Agriculture of PeruEducation and training for hydrology and water resourcesdevelopment and management in India .......................................140Rakesh Kumar and R. D. Singh, National Institute of Hydrology, IndiaWater education and cooperation initiatives at theNational Water Resources Institute, Nigeria ...................................144Dr Olusanjo A. Bamgboye, Executive Director/Chief Executive and Dr Omogbemi O.Yaya, Chief Lecturer, National Water Resources Institute, Kaduna, NigeriaSustainable management of lakes in Malaysia ...............................148Zati Sharip, Senior Research Officer, Research Centre for Water Quality andEnvironment; Saim Suratman, Director, Research Centre for Geohydrology; andAhmad Jamalluddin Shaaban, Director General, National Hydraulic ResearchInstitute of Malaysia, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, MalaysiaFree open source software as a tool for water cooperation ..............152Cicero Bley, Coordinator, International Centre on HydroinformaticsIVFINANCING COOPERATIONRegional cooperation in the water and sanitation sector:Latin America and the Caribbean ..................................................156Miguel Campo Llopis, Anamaria Nunez and Jorge Ducci, Inter-AmericanDevelopment BankPoverty reduction and economic transformationthrough water cooperation .............................................................159Sering Jallow, Director, Water and Sanitation Department and African WaterFacility, African Development BankWaterCredit: solving the global water crisis throughcommunity collaboration, government engagementand economic stimulation ............................................................163Gary White, CEO; Stephen Harris Jr, Grants Manager; and Rosemary Gudelj,Manager of Public Affairs, Water.orgGovernance for cooperation and successful watershedconservation strategies: the Water Funds case ..............................167Vidal Garza, Carlos Hurtado, Priscilla Treviño and Ilsa Ruiz, FEMSA FoundationWater and development: a history of cooperation in theDominican Republic ......................................................................134Fernando Rivera Colinton, Researcher, Centre for the SustainableManagement of Water Resources in the Caribbean Island States,National Water Research Institute (INDRHI)[ 7 ]
ContentsVLEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELIntegrated water resource management – combining perspectivesfrom law, policy and science .........................................................172Andrew Allan, Susan Baggett, Michael Bonell, Geoffrey Gooch, Sarah Hendry,Alistair Rieu-Clarke and Chris Spray, Dundee Centre for Water Law, Policy andScience, University of Dundee, ScotlandCommunity benefits achieved through developing legalframeworks at domestic and transboundary levels ........................176Stefano Burchi, Chairman, Executive Council, International Association for Water LawNew approaches to planning and decision-making for fresh water:cooperative water management in New Zealand ............................178Clive Howard-Williams, Chief Scientist, National Institute for Water andAtmospheric Research, Christchurch; Alastair Bisley, Chairman, Land and WaterForum, Ministry for the Environment, and Ken Taylor, Director Investigations andMonitoring, Canterbury Regional Council, New ZealandThe US-Mexico institutional arrangement for transboundarywater governance ..........................................................................182Polioptro F. Martinez-Austria and Luis Ernesto Derbez, University of Las AmericasPuebla, Mexico; and Maria Elena Giner, Border Environment CooperationCommission, Mexico-United StatesVIWATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITYAND POVERTY ERADICATIONManaging water: from local wisdom to modern science .................188Ignasius D. A. Sutapa, Executive Secretary, Asia Pacific Centre for EcohydrologyWater for life: inspiring action and promoting best practicesin local cooperation .......................................................................192Josefina Maestu and Pilar Gonzalez-Meyaui, United Nations Office to Support theInternational Decade for Action ‘Water for Life’ 2005-2015/UN-Water DecadeProgramme on Advocacy and CommunicationInternational water cooperation ....................................................196Kitty van der Heijden, Ambassador, Sustainable Development and Director,Department for Climate, Energy, Environment and Water, Ministry of ForeignAffairs, The NetherlandsCooperating to manage liquid waste in the OkavangoDelta Ramsar Site ..........................................................................199Michael Ramaano, Project Manager, Global Water Partnership BotswanaSecretariat; Nkobi Mpho Moleele, Project Manager, Okavango Research InstituteWater cooperation in Korea ...........................................................203Boosik Kang, Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Dankook Universityand Korea Water Resources AssociationWater expertise and cooperation: Hungary’s international policy ...207Dr Gábor Baranyai, Chair of Organizing Committee, Budapest Water Summit, andDeputy State Secretary, EU Sectoral Policies, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, HungaryAssessment of Lebanon’s shared water resources and the needfor effective cooperation.................................................................211Amin Shaban, Talal Darwich and Mouin Hamze, National Council for ScientificResearch, Beirut, LebanonAlternative water resources in agriculture for improvingproduction and poverty reduction .................................................215Shoaib Ismail, Ian McCann, Shabbir Shahid , Fiona Chandler and Mohamed AmraniInternational Center for Biosaline Agriculture, Dubai, United Arab EmiratesManaging water, sustainability and poverty reduction throughcollective community action .........................................................218Suhas P. Wani, K.H. Anantha and William D. Dar, International Crops ResearchInstitute for the Semi-Arid TropicsA blueprint for sustainable groundwater management inBalochistan, Pakistan ....................................................................222Shahbaz Mushtaq, Kathryn Reardon-Smith and Roger Stone, Australian Centre forSustainable Catchments, University of Southern Queensland, Australia; and SyedMohammad Khair, Balochistan University of Information, Technology, Engineeringand Management Sciences, Quetta, PakistanWater cooperation – the Brazilian case .........................................225Paulo Augusto Cunha Libânio, Water Resources Specialist,National Water Agency, BrazilEnvironmental rehabilitation of the Lake Pátzcuaro watershed,Michoacán, Mexico .......................................................................229Miguel A. Córdova, Appropriate and Industrial Technology Subdivision Head,Mexican Institute of Water Technology and Ramón Pérez Gil Salcido, Director,Water Program, Gonzalo Río Arronte FoundationSuez Environnement’s contribution to water cooperation issues:he case of Algiers ..........................................................................233Jean-Louis Chaussade, CEO, Suez EnvironnementPreparing Denmark for climate changes .........................................237Jan Tøibner, Aarhus Water Ltd.Developing community water services and cooperation in Finlandand the South ...............................................................................240Tapio S. Katko, UNESCO Chair in Sustainable Water Services, TampereUniversity of Technology; and Antti Rautavaara, Senior Water Advisor,Ministry for Foreign AffairsExamples of cooperation in the Czech Republic flood forecastingand information service ................................................................245Jan Danhelka, Eva Soukalova and Lucie Brezkova, Czech HydrometeorologicalInstitute; and Jan Cernik, Czech Development AgencyWetland cooperation is taking care of water ..................................248Tobias Salathé, Senior Advisor, Ramsar Convention SecretariatBetter late than never .....................................................................252Dr Claudine Brelet, HDR[ 8 ]
ContentsVIIECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERWater cooperation for sustainable utilization:Lake Naivasha, Kenya ....................................................................256Professor David M. Harper, Dr Nic Pacini, Dr Caroline Upton, Dr Ed H. J.Morrison, Mr Richard Fox, and Mr Enock KimintaSecuring Australia’s groundwater future ........................................260Professor Craig T. Simmons, Director, National Centre for Groundwater Researchand Training, Australia; and Neil Power, Director, State Research Coordination,Goyder Institute for Water Research, South AustraliaAdvancing sustainable groundwater management in Abu Dhabi,United Arab Emirates ....................................................................263Dr Mohamed Yousef Al Madfaei, Executive Director, Integrated EnvironmentalPolicy and Planning Sector; Eva Ramos, Director, Environmental Analysis andEconomics; and Hessa Abdelsattar Banijabir, Environmental Analyst, EnvironmentAgency-Abu DhabiWater resources management as an engine for economic growthin the Republic of Korea ...............................................................267Kyung-Jin Min, Director and Sunkyo Hong, Researcher, Research Center for WaterPolicy and Economy, K-waterPUB Singapore’s efforts in advancing water cooperation ...............271Ms Quek Ai Choo, Deputy Director; Mr Bernard Tan, Senior Assistant Director; MrYeo Sheng Wei, Senior Manager; Ms Nawwar Syahirah, Communications Executive,PUB, SingaporeTowards water sensitive cities: a three-pillar approach ...................275Tony H. F. Wong, Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive CitiesIntegrated urban water frameworks for emerging cities insub-Saharan Africa ........................................................................279Kala Vairavamoorthy, Seneshaw Tsegaye and Jochen Eckart, Patel College of GlobalSustainability, University of South Florida, USAWater resources management on the island of Crete:lessons learned ..............................................................................283E. Baltas, Associate Professor, School of Civil Engineering, National TechnicalUniversity of Athens; and O. Tzoraki, Assistant Professor, School of Environment,University of AegeanKEI’s international collaboration on water-related research ...........295Tae Ho Ro, Eulsaeng Cho and Jun Hyun Park, Korea Environment InstituteEcohydrology – transdisciplinary sustainability science formulticultural cooperation ..............................................................299Professor Macej Zalewski, Katarzyna Izydorczyk, Iwona Wagner, Associate ProfessorJoanna Mankiewicz-Boczek, Magdalena Urbaniak, and Wojciech Fr tczak, EuropeanRegional Centre for Ecohydrology, Polish Academy of SciencesSharing water observations: turning local datainto global information .................................................................304Dr Harry Dixon, Professor John Rodda and Professor Alan Jenkins, Centre for Ecologyand Hydrology, UK; Professor Siegfried Demuth, United Nations Educational Scientificand Cultural Organization; and Ulrich Looser, Federal Institute of Hydrology, GermanyInternational cooperation on water sciences and research ..............308Raya Marina Stephan, Chair, Publications Committee and Tom Soo, ExecutiveDirector, International Water Resources AssociationThe Eco-Smart Waterworks System ................................................311Soo Hong Noh, Centre for Eco-Smart Waterworks System, Yonsei UniversityWater and Livelihoods Initiative: scientific cooperation andcollaboration across North Africa and the Middle East ...................315C. King, Water and Livelihoods Initiative; S. Christiansen, Director, Office of WaterResources and Environment, United States Agency for International Development;T. Oweis, Director, Integrated Water and Land Management Program; andB. Dessalegn, Communication and Project Management specialist, InternationalCenter for Agricultural Research in the Dry AreasWater for sustainable developmentand adaptation to climate change .................................................319Milan Dimkic, Miodrag Milovanovic and Radisav Pavlovic, Jaroslav Cerni Institutefor the Development of Water Resources, SerbiaCooperation on water sciences and research ..................................322Christophe Cudennec, Gordon Young, Hubert Savenije, International Association ofHydrological SciencesTen years of awarding innovation ..................................................325Abdulmalek A. Al Alshaikh, General Secretary, Prince Sultan Bin AbdulazizInternational Prize for WaterNotes and References ....................................................................328VIIIINTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATERSCIENCES AND RESEARCHUnderstanding the Global Water System for Water Cooperation ...288Sina Marx and Anik Bhaduri, Global Water System Project, International ProjectOffice, Bonn, GermanyA use-inspired approach to sustainable water management ............291Omar Osman, Vice-Chancellor; Kamarulazizi Ibrahim, Director,Professor; Kanayathu Koshy, Professor of Sustainability, Centre for Global SustainabilityStudies; Ismail Abustan, Professor, School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia[ 9 ]
MR JÁNOS ÁDER, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF HUNGARYLooking at the future of our water resources, I am sure many readers of Free Flow will agree with thestriking conclusion of Hungarian-born Nobel laureate physicist, Dénes Gábor: “Until today man hasfought nature. From now on man has to fight his own nature.” Over the next few decades, 2 billion humanbeings will be added to the global population amid dramatically changing climatic conditions, and this willnecessitate significant changes in the way we manage our waters.I am convinced that the growing uncertainties surrounding the availability and quality of water can onlybe tackled successfully if all affected stakeholders – government, businesses, civil society and academia – acttogether. Mutual dependencies will only increase over time as regions and sectors exposed to water shortage relymore and more on waters controlled by others. Water must therefore be treated as a high political priority that isintegrated into other policy areas. Needless to say, cooperation is essential – not only between sectors, but alsoacross geographical and political boundaries.In view of these objectives, at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio deJaniero in June 2012, I invited the international community to Budapest to better define an internationalwater-related sustainable development goal. Hungary was honoured to host the Budapest Water Summitwhere decision makers, scientists, civil society activists and business people gathered to discuss the role ofwater in sustainable development.Hungary has developed a strong tradition of prudent water management over the centuries. Our water expertshave provided assistance to developing nations for decades. Given the hydrogeological conditions of the country,transboundary water cooperation is an unquestionable imperative for Hungary. Naturally, Hungary wishes toremain at the core of the global political discourse on water, as this discourse is a precondition to safeguardour water resources for future generations. We, Hungarians, stand ready to join other nations and share ourexperience to give the future a chance!Mr János ÁderPresident of the Republic of Hungary[ 10 ]
MR EMOMALI RAHMON, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF TAJIKISTANOver the past two decades humanity has made considerable progress in providing access to fresh water andsanitation, in managing water resources and establishing partnerships in these areas. However, in some partsof the world people do not yet have access to safe drinking water and sanitation. Moreover, climate change,increases in water consumption in various economic sectors (primarily in agriculture) and many other factorscreate additional difficulties for developing a complex approach towards the solution of water-related problems.Under the current circumstances an urgent need has emerged to undertake coordinated and concerted actionsfor strengthening water partnership and dialogue. Tajikistan was guided by this particular consideration when, in2010, it put forward the initiative to declare 2013 as the International Year of Water Cooperation (IYWC).This year the international community has been actively involved in a multilateral process for theimplementation of the decisions made by the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development inRio in 2012. It is impossible to attain sustainable development without giving comprehensive considerationto the water component in the sustainable development goals. Integrated and effective management of waterresources, based on rational and wise policy reinforced by the required human and financial resources, canprovide a foundation for achieving sustainable and equal access to safe drinking water and sanitation.When initiating the IYWC, my country proceeded from the assumption that the year 2013 will make anadditional contribution to the implementation of the International Decade for Action ‘Water for Life’ 2005-2015. The end of the Water Decade is at hand, and so is the timeframe identified for the implementationof the millennium development goals (MDGs). We are convinced that the IYWC will provide a uniqueopportunity for discussing the existing problems and drawbacks, as well as for enhancing the effortstowards a timely and complete achievement of the MDGs.It is known that with population growth and economic development, the demand on water increases; sodoes competition among the economic sectors for water resources. The transboundary component of thewater agenda is a serious issue that demands urgent and adequate measures. Lack of adequate cooperationin the basins of transboundary rivers entails serious risks and losses. There is no doubt that development ofwater cooperation at the transboundary level promotes the solution of these issues and contributes to theachievement of peace and security.The implementation of the IYWC also provides a good opportunity to reconsider our attitude towardswater resources, and to focus on establishing sustainable water partnership and dialogue, and on enhancingthe means and ways of water diplomacy. The full range of these and other issues was considered at theInternational High-Level Conference on Water Cooperation in Dushanbe on 20-22 August. We hope thatall the parties concerned will take an active part in inplementation of the IYWC.Mr Emomali RahmonPresident of the Republic of Tajikistan[ 11 ]
FREE FLOWWater security through science-based cooperation:UNESCO’s International Hydrological ProgrammeBlanca Jiménez-Cisneros, Alexander Otte, Miguel de França Doria, Giuseppe Arduino,Léna Salamé, Siegfried Demuth, Anil Mishra, Alice AureliThe International Year of Water Cooperation reflects theglobal recognition that fresh water is vital for humanhealth, prosperity and peace and that internationallyagreed development objectives, in particular poverty eradication,gender equality, food security and the safeguarding ofecosystems and their life-supporting functions, cannot be facedwithout resolving current and future water challenges.In June 2012, the United Nations Conference on SustainableDevelopment underlined the need to address an array of water issuesincluding extreme events, pollution and wastewater treatment. Headsof state, governments and high-level representatives stated in theoutcome document The Future We Want that “water is at the coreof sustainable development as it is closely linked to a number of keyglobal challenges. We therefore reiterate the importance of integratingwater in sustainable development... In order to achieve this end westress the need for international assistance and cooperation.” 1Given its vital role, water has a specific target under the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs), is a thematic area under consultationfor the post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda and is recognizedas a human right. While water is a distinctive feature of ourplanet, allowing life to flourish, freshwater is a limited resource andImage: © Alexander Otte/UNESCOis unevenly distributed in space and time. Billions ofpeople are affected by water challenges including scarcity,water supply and sanitation.Currently, 85 per cent of the world’s human populationlive in the drier half of the Earth. All regions– particularly Africa – face serious freshwater challenges,albeit in different contexts. Our water resourcesare under increasingly severe pressures from climatechange and other global changes such as urbanization,intensified agricultural and industrial production,and population growth. Combined with the currenteconomic and financial crisis, this situation endangersthe significant progress achieved over recent decades inproviding safe drinking water and adequate sanitation.Almost 800 million people still have no access to safewater; nearly 2.5 billion lack access to basic sanitation;and 6-8 million die each year from water-related disastersand diseases. Climate change is aggravating this situation,as is the fact that almost 85 per cent of the world’stotal wastewater is discharged without adequate or anytreatment. Women, children and those living underconditions of poverty suffer most of the burdens causedby the water crisis. In some parts of the globe, they oftenwalk for hours to fetch unsafe water, sometimes underlife-threatening conditions, jeopardizing their chancesfor education. The water crisis contrasts with the goal of‘water security’ – that is “the capacity of a population tosafeguard access to adequate quantities of water of acceptablequality for sustaining human and ecosystem healthon a watershed basis, and to ensure efficient protection oflife and property against water-related hazards – floods,landslides, land subsidence, and droughts.” 2Facts and figuresWater management must go beyond protection and restoration, and recognize thecarrying capacity of ecosystems in the face of increasing human impact• Groundwater is critical for the livelihoods of nearly 1.5billion rural households in the poorer regions of Africa andAsia, and for domestic supplies of a large share of theworld’s population elsewhere• Almost 85 per cent of the world’s total wastewater isdischarged without adequate or any treatment• 145 nations have territories within at least onetransboundary river basin• The costs of adapting to climate change impacts on waterare estimated to be around US$12 billion per year by 2050,with 83-90 per cent in developing countries.[ 12 ]
FREE FLOWWater cooperation is necessary to properly address a large number ofmanagement issues, such as water allocation decisions, upstream anddownstream impacts of water pollution and water abstraction, infrastructuredevelopment, overexploitation, and financing of water management.Water cooperation refers to the joint and organized management anduse of freshwater resources at local, national, regional and internationallevels among various players and sectors. The concept of water cooperationentails working together towards a common goal, in a way that ismutually beneficial. It is based on broader forms of cooperation, such asthe joint acquisition and sharing of water-related data, cooperation on thedevelopment of institutional and human capacities, and intergovernmentalcooperation on freshwater issues.With this in mind, the United Nations General Assemblydeclared 2013 as the United Nations International Year of WaterCooperation. 3 The 31 members of UN-Water officially appointed theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO) to lead preparations for both the 2013 InternationalYear and World Water Day, in cooperation with the United NationsEconomic Commission for Europe and with the support of theUnited Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, theUN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity Development and theUN-Water Decade Programme on Advocacy and Communication.UNESCO has a long-standing commitment to promoting cooperationin fresh water through the International Hydrological Programme(IHP), which is governed by an Intergovernmental Council, a subsidiarybody of UNESCO’s General Conference. IHP is implemented inphases developed through a comprehensive consultative process with168 IHP National Committees, international scientific associationsand other United Nations bodies, ensuring its continuous relevanceand overall institutional coordination. Its eighth phase, IHP-VIII 2014-2021, covers ‘Water security: responses to local, regional, and socialchallenges’. As in previous phases, IHP will foster collaboration amongUNESCO’s Member States on water issues identified through their IHPNational Committees, joining forces with the ‘UNESCO water family’.IHP activities are based on the priorities and needs expressed byUNESCO Member States and implemented in six-year phases. Thefocus of IHP-VII (2008-2013) was on ‘Water dependencies: systemsunder stress and societal responses’. IHP-VIII (2014-2021) concentrateson six knowledge areas to help Member States to properly manageand secure water, and to ensure the required human and institutionalcapacities. IHP-VIII is articulated along six themes, focusing on waterrelateddisasters and hydrological change, groundwater, water scarcityand quality, water and human settlements, ecohydrology, and watereducation. This strategic plan focuses on three strategic axes:• Mobilizing international cooperation to improve knowledgeand innovation to address water security challenges• Strengthening the science-policy interface to reach watersecurity at local, national, regional and global levels• Developing institutional and human capacities for watersecurity and sustainability.Axis 1: Mobilizing international cooperationHistory shows that cooperation at international, regional and nationallevels takes full expression in the context of fresh water. Such cooperationis needed not only to avoid potential conflicts, but for theadequate management of transboundary basins and aquifers, for theadvancement of knowledge, and for the development of human andinstitutional capacities. UNESCO endeavours to strengthen internationaland regional cooperation in the field of water by fosteringalliances, building intellectual exchange, and encouragingknowledge sharing and operational partnerships for watersecurity. UNESCO’s benchmarking activities, which arekey to this axis, will be continued and enhanced throughan improved annual World Water Development Reportdedicated to specific topics of global importance.Axis 2: Strengthening the science-policy interfaceWater security can only be attained through the developmentof suitable policies, based on sound knowledge ofwater and its interactions. The comprehensive mandateof UNESCO allows an integrated, multisectoral andinterdisciplinary approach, including the mobilization ofscience, innovation and engineering. The intergovernmentalnature of IHP places UNESCO at the forefrontof the science-policy interface. The organization reinforcesthe cooperation between existing institutions andnational partners within its water family and mobilizes thescientific community, including local experts in developingcountries, to build scientific consensus and provideguidance to policymakers for informed decision-making.Specific attention is given to traditional and indigenousknowledge, gender equality, social inclusion and povertyeradication. UNESCO continuously supports the developmentand implementation of international norms andstandards, such as the Law of Transboundary Aquifers 4and the provision of guidance for the integrated managementof water resources, among other issues.Axis 3: Developing institutional andhuman capacitiesWater security cannot be reached without the developmentof adequate human and institutional capacities,both within and outside of the water sector. UNESCO willpursue the strengthening of water education at all levels,including aspects related to knowledge, skills and values.This includes the provision of formal and informal education,guidance on the development and evaluation of watereducation curricula, assistance on educational policies andthe development of educational materials. The organization’sefforts in this field are multisectoral, involving abroad series of partners and programmes such as IHP, theUNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, Educationfor Sustainable Development, ASPnet, the UNESCOuniversity twinning and networking system UNITWIN,Teacher Training, the UNESCO-UNEVOC internationalcentre for technical and vocational education and training,youth initiatives, UNESCO chairs and centres. In terms ofinstitutional capacities, UNESCO continues to support theestablishment, strengthening and networking of national,regional and international water-related bodies.These three axes have strong interlinkages and mutuallyreinforce each other. The complexity and multidimensionalnature of water-related challenges will continueto be addressed through an interdisciplinary approachon topics including climate change and coastal zones;groundwater; disasters; youth; water as a human right;water education including contributions to the UnitedNations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development[ 13 ]
FREE FLOWThe UNESCO Water FamilyImage: © UNESCOThe UNESCO water family worldwideSince its early focus on water, initiated in 1956, UNESCO has developeda comprehensive water family, comprising IHP and its 168 NationalCommittees, UNESCO-IHE, the network of water-related centres under theauspices of UNESCO, UNESCO Chairs and WWAP. These structures involvea global workforce of approximately 1,000 water experts and graduateresearchers at the service of Member States. This UNESCO networkis regarded as the leading agency for freshwater sciences and policy,governance, and management advice.IHP is the intergovernmental cooperation programme on water sciences,research, governance, management and education. It was created in 1975as a follow-up to the International Hydrological Decade, and is governed by anIntergovernmental Council and implemented by 168 IHP National Committees.The UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education in Delft, the Netherlands,formally became part of UNESCO in 2003. UNESCO-IHE is the largestpostgraduate water education facility in the world. It confers fullyaccredited Masters degrees and promotes PhDs. It has enhanced thecapacities of 14,500 water professionals from over 160 countries.WWAP, in Perugia, Italy, is a flagship programme of UN-Water, whichbrings together 30 United Nations agencies. It is housed, administeredand led by UNESCO. Starting in 2014, WWAP will produce the periodicWorld Water Development Reports on an annual basis and on specifictopics (such as water and energy), with a five-year global synthesis report.The network of 18 established water-related centres under the auspices ofUNESCO (category 2 institutes and centres) contributes to the implementationof IHP at the international and regional level. Eight additional centres wereapproved by the General Conference and are currently being established.The 29 water-related UNESCO Chairs and UNITWIN networkspromote intellectual cooperation through twinning and other linkingarrangements among institutions and academics, to foster access toand sharing of knowledge.(UN DESD); physical aspects of hydrology; training of media professionalson water issues; water-related cultural and natural heritage andthe cultural aspects of water.In each axis, specific attention will be given to UNESCO’s globalpriorities of Africa and gender equality, and to youth and small islanddevelopment states, South-South, North-South, North-North andtriangular cooperation at the regional and global levels. UNESCOfosters existing partnerships with public and private partners andbuilds strategic partnerships to successfully address the complexchallenges related to water security. UNESCO centres and chairsplay an important role in this process, and IHP currently pursues theimprovement of their geographical and thematic scope, also in thelight of UNESCO’s global priorities of Africa and gender equality.Due to global changes, high demographic pressure and the lackof effective governance and management of surface and groundwaterresources, many regions in Africa are particularly vulnerable todroughts and floods. It is crucial to continue supporting Africancountries in the domain of water sciences and cooperation, becausedeveloping the scientific understanding of hydrological processesand phenomena constitutes a source of socioeconomic developmentand regional and international solidarity. UNESCO gives specialattention to water, peace and security; building up resilience towater-related disasters; capacity building; and the role that groundwaterresources play in rural areas for agriculture and inurban areas for regional development, notably in waterscarceareas and in the context of climate change.Equality between women and men exists when bothgenders are able to share equally in the distribution ofpower and knowledge and have equal opportunities,rights and obligations. Gender equality is an essentialcomponent of human rights, and a key to development.Yet, of the world’s 1 billion poorest people, three fifthsare women and girls. At the same time, women make uponly one quarter of the world’s researchers. 5Access to freshwater resources directly influenceswomen’s lives. Women represent the majority of peopleaffected by unsafe water and sanitation; they are mostoften the collectors, users and managers of water inhouseholds and are heavily engaged in agriculturalactivities for food production. Their responsibility inusing, providing and managing water for household andlivelihoods means that women play a crucial role in thesustainable use and management of water resources.UNESCO’s gender mainstreaming approach ensuresthat women and men benefit equally from programmeand policy support. It aims at achieving all international[ 14 ]
FREE FLOWThe Vaal dam, South Africa: scientific understanding of hydrological processes andphenomena is key to socioeconomic developmentdevelopment goals, including those explicitly seeking to attaingender equality. Means include:• identifying gaps in gender equality through use of genderanalysis and sex-disaggregated data• raising awareness about gaps and building support for changethrough advocacy and alliances/partnerships• developing strategies and programmes to close existing gaps• putting adequate resources and the necessary expertise into place• monitoring implementation• holding individuals and institutions accountable for results.In the water sector, gender mainstreaming means integrating the genderequality perspective into the design, monitoring and evaluation of waterresources management, water governance and educational, trainingand capacity-building activities; developing capacities on water-relatedissues and women’s empowerment; and fostering research projects tomeet the global water challenges defined by the MDGs and beyond.The implementation of the IHP is supported by cross-cuttingprogrammes and initiatives, some of them conducted jointly withother UN agencies (e.g. WMO, UN-ISDR and UNU) and organizations(e.g. IAHS, IHA): Hydrology for the Environment, Lifeand Policy programme (HELP), Flow Regimes from InternationalExperimental and Network Data programme (FRIEND),International Flood Initiative (IFI), International Drought Initiative(IDI), International Sediment Initiative (ISI), From PotentialConflict to Cooperation Potential (PCCP), Joint InternationalIsotope Hydrology Programme (JIIHP), Internationally SharedAquifer Resources Management (ISARM), Global Network onWater and Development Information in Arid Lands (G-WADI),Urban Water Management Programme (UWMP), InternationalInitiative on Water Quality, World Hydrogeological Map(WHYMAP) and Groundwater Resources Assessment under thePressures of Humanity and Climate Change (GRAPHIC).”The broad range of IHP initiatives is always based on the principlesof human solidarity, compassion and internationally agreed ethicalImage: © Alexander Otte/UNESCOstandards, and promotes water cooperation throughscientific research and education. It aims at raisingawareness about water in people’s minds and solicitingtheir ethical reference system to pave the way for sustainablemanagement decisions and solutions.Two IHP initiatives focus specifically on the soundmanagement of transboundary water resources, bothgroundwater and surface water: ISARM and PCCP.Grounded in a multidisciplinary approach which incorporatesscientific, legal, economic, political and socialaspects, both programmes address challenges andopportunities related to shared water resources.Internationally Shared Aquifers ResourcesManagement Programme (ISARM)When it comes to considering regional and global waterpolicy issues, the physical status and quality trends ofgroundwater resources have yet to be taken adequatelyinto account. Because geological formations have noregard for water catchments or national boundaries,resources in many aquifers are shared by adjacentstates and require transboundary management. ISARMcreates tools comprising detailed technical guidelines,examples of legal and other institutional frameworks,mappings, a fully referenced database and extendedassessments and case studies for example with the helpof various partners, like the International GroundwaterResources Assessment Centre (for details see the articleof IGRAC in this book, for example).From Potential Conflict to CooperationPotential (PCCP)In 2000, UNESCO launched the PCCP project to fosterpeace, cooperation and development related to themanagement of transboundary water resources. PCCPis an associated initiative of IHP and WWAP, whichuses research and training as entry points to build confidence,trust and dialogue between users of shared waterresources. PCCP facilitates multilevel and interdisciplinarydialogues. Under the umbrella of non-threateningand constructive joint work in research and education,it offers a forum for key players involved in the managementof transboundary waters in order to shift themaway from potential conflicts, towards cooperationpotential. Such Track II avenues for water diplomacylay the foundation for actual political cooperation andnegotiations: when the level of trust is mature enough,and if all parties concerned are willing, UNESCO canuse its intergovernmental leverage power to bring thedialogue to another level of negotiations.Since its inception, PCCP has developed general trainingmaterial as well as material adapted to the regionalspecificities of Africa, Latin America, Asia, Europe andthe Middle East with trainers from across the selectedregions and a variety of disciplines. When finalized thematerial is made available to local training institutionsfor further use and dissemination. The initiative hasdeveloped and produced an unprecedented series ofpublications and online databases that support water[ 15 ]
FREE FLOWImage: © Alexander Otte/UNESCOImage: © Alexander Otte/UNESCOWater is a cross-cutting issue which demands attention at all levels and involvesmany stakeholders across sectorsCooperative processes offer stakeholders an opportunity to build ashared vision for the future management of their water resourcesmanagement professionals, researchers and students in engineering,economics, geography, geology and political science in their workon transboundary water management.PCCP also supports cooperative processes related to the managementof transboundary waters. Through the inception of joint researchon selected water bodies, the initiative promotes cooperation amongthe riparian states concerned with the water resources in question.This is achieved by involving high-level players, governmental advisers,experts and stakeholders who participate in the preparation ofconsensus documents reflecting the status of conflict and cooperationin the transboundary water body. This joint research process providesa venue in which to discuss sensitive issues related to the transboundarywater body, in addition to supporting cooperation, exchange ofdata and information, and development of the shared resource. Lastly,the process offers stakeholders an opportunity to build a shared visionfor the future management of their water resources.Ecohydrology for sustainabilityHuman activities interact with the delicate balance between waterresources and environmental sustainability. Therefore we need to betterunderstand water as both an abiotic resource and an integral part ofecosystems; not only to identify and quantify the critical linkages thatregulate the interrelationships of hydrology and biota, but also to seehow the controlled interaction with these linkages may contribute toenvironmental sustainability. The management approach has to gobeyond protection and restoration. It has to recognize the carryingcapacity of ecosystems in the face of increasing human impact and findways to improve and transfer solutions across a variety of environments.Under this theme, IHP is filling existing knowledge gaps byaddressing issues related to critical water systems, such as in aridand semi-arid zones, coastal areas, estuaries and urbanized areaswhere ecohydrological processes have not yet been sufficientlyaddressed. IHP also works to show how better knowledge of theinterrelationships between the hydrological cycle andbiota can contribute to more cost-effective, sociallyacceptable and environmental-friendly management offreshwater. Advancing the integration of social, ecologicaland hydrological research is key to a sound scientificbasis in this domain. The Ecohydrology programmealso aims at providing system solutions and facilitatingtechnology exchange. IHP set up interdisciplinaryworking groups to serve the initiative’s objectives:• The Education and Capacity Building WorkingGroup is developing a curriculum of academiccourses and practitioner trainings• The Demonstration Working Group is workingon criteria to recognize sites where sustainable,innovative and transdisciplinary water managementpractices based on ecohydrology principles areimplemented. Demonstration projects have appliedthe ecohydrology approach since 2005.• The Integration and Upscaling Working Group isinvestigating the key intersections between socialand economic sciences and those studying thehydrological/ecological cycles.• The Gender and Social Cultural BiodiversityGroup aims to bridge the gap between thehydrological, social and ecological/environmentalsciences by exploring community cultural values.It endeavours to reframe the policy discourse andlanguage to engage the grass-roots community inplanning processes for empowerment and socialchange, based on free, prior and informed consent.• The Ecohydrology Modelling and Visualization Groupis working on tools, such as modelling software, toinform and support water managers and planners inachieving integrated water resource management.[ 16 ]
FREE FLOWAdaptation to global change impacts on water resourcesGlobal changes, such as demographic growth, land use change,urbanization, and climate change place a serious pressure over waterresources. In particular the impacts of climate change, includingchanges in temperature, precipitation and sea level, are expectedto have varying consequences for the availability of fresh water inthe world. Several IHP projects support Member States in reducingvulnerability to climate and global change impacts on water resourcesand achieving sustainable water management. By coordinatingscience-based cooperation among countries facing similar challenges,the projects strengthen regional and topical research capacities andincrease the chances for creating appropriate solutions.One example is the work on glaciers. They are an intrinsicelement of the water-related culture, landscape and environmentin high mountain regions; and they are key indicators and uniquedemonstrations of global warming and climate change. With risingglobal temperatures, glaciers are experiencing a rapid decline inmass. Given their important role as sources of fresh water, changesin mountain glaciers will have significant impacts on livelihoods.The current IHP project, ‘International Multidisciplinary Networkfor Adaptation Strategies related to the Impact of Glacier Retreat inthe Andes’, is addressing climate change impacts on Andean glaciers,in partnership with the Andean Climate Change Inter-AmericanObservatory network, El Consorcio para el Desarrollo Sostenible dela Ecorregión Andina, the Mountain Partnership Secretariat (Foodand Agriculture Organization) and the Working Group on Snowand Ice of the IHP for Latin America and the Caribbean. The projectis establishing an international multidisciplinary network whichwill help to enhance resilience to global change impacts includingclimate change and variability; analyse and develop understandingof vulnerabilities (environmental and non-environmental); andidentify opportunities and challenges for adaptation.Water educationThe looming water crisis is to a large extent due to a lack of waterrelatedcapacities rather than a lack of water resources. Water educationis key for the achievement of water-related development goals andconcerns all levels, settings and types of education. IHP assists MemberStates in enhancing water-related education since its inception and is athematic leader for the implementation of the water component of theUNESCO-led UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development.Educational activities on water strongly promote cooperation and acommon understanding. At the higher education level this includes thedevelopment of international and regional centres devoted to specificwater themes and the establishment of UNESCO Chairs in universitieswith requirements on South-South, North-South and triangular cooperationon education and research. At the level of stakeholder and schooleducation, it comprises the inclusion of cooperation development skillsin the curricula, the development of joint basin-wide (sometimes transboundary)school projects, and the training of educators and trainersat the regional level.Arid and semi-arid environmentsArid and semi-arid areas face the greatest pressures to deliver andmanage freshwater resources. These areas are particularly prone toclimate change-induced vulnerability, with potentially serious socialand environmental consequences.The IHP G-WADI programme has been successfully stimulatingcooperation among regional networks across Asia, LatinAmerica and the Caribbean, sub-Saharan Africaand Arabia. G-WADI aims to strengthen the globalcapacity to manage the water resources of aridand semi-arid areas. For example, it developedthe G-WADI Geo-server, in collaboration with theCentre for Hydrometerology and Remote Sensing ofthe University of California in Irvine. This providesonline data access and visualization tools for precipitation,especially important in transboundary basinsand aquifers in areas where ground observationnetworks are lacking. The project’s website helpswater resource managers to improve flood forecastingand warning, and drought monitoring.Managing extremes: IFIFlooding is the greatest known water-related naturaldisaster, affecting an estimated 520 million peopleacross the world yearly, resulting in up to 25,000annual deaths. Along with other water-related disasters,floods cost the world economy some US$50-60 billiona year. 6 An estimated 96 per cent of deaths related tonatural disasters in the past decade occurred in developingcountries with limited capacity to forecast andmanage these disasters. The number of people vulnerableto a devastating flood is expected to rise, due tolarge-scale urbanization, population growth in naturalflood plains, increasing rates of deforestation, climatechange and rising sea levels.IFI aims at developing capacities in MemberStates to understand and better respond to floods bytaking advantage of their benefits while minimizingtheir social, economic and environmental risks. Italso addresses existing management gaps through aholistic approach and provides a platform for furthercollaborative efforts. This requires an alliance ofcompetencies and mandates, and UNESCO IHP closelycooperates with its partners WMO, UNU, IAHS, ISDRand the International Centre for Water Hazard andRisk Management. This network has developed anenhanced knowledge system on all flood-related activities,such as monitoring, network design, improvingstatistical analysis of floods, real-time forecasting andflood modelling and risk management.Water challenges are among the greatest dangersfor humanity. To face them and to succeed in sustainabledevelopment, we need better cooperation amongall water users, managers and those providing thegovernance framework. By its very nature, water isa cross-cutting issue which demands attention at alllevels and involves many stakeholders across sectors,sometimes with conflicting and competing needs.Water cooperation therefore takes many forms: frommanaging shared underground aquifers and riverbasins, to scientific data exchange, to financial andtechnical cooperation. Cooperation between womenand men for gender-sensitive water governance isfundamental. Cooperation in education, capacitydevelopment and awareness raising prepares peoplefor the future.[ 17 ]
IWater Diplomacy
WATER DIPLOMACYTransboundary water cooperationNick Bonvoisin, Secretary to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Waters and International Lakes,and Co-Secretary to its Protocol on Water and Health, United Nations Economic Commission for EuropeOver half of the world’s precious freshwater flows in thecatchment areas, or basins, of rivers, lakes and aquifersthat cross national borders. These transboundarybasins are home to about 40 per cent of the world’s population.Whether and how countries cooperate in the protection anduse of these water resources therefore has a profound impacton society, the economy, the environment and on the waterresources themselves. Countries sharing a transboundary basinshare interests, risks and opportunities in the joint development,use, management and protection of transboundary waterresources. Where there is a lack of cooperation, and wheredisputes over water arise, water management is inefficient,impacting water quantity, quality and socioeconomic integrity,as well as raising political tension.And water wars? The alarm bell has been rung many times but actualconflict seems rare. However, new research by the Strategic ForesightGroup think tank suggests that “countries that have cooperativearrangements in shared water enjoy overall peace and cooperationeven in non-water sectors. Conversely, the countries that do nothave any or good water cooperation arrangements tend to have verySafe drinking water is a universal rightImage: UNECEpoor security environments and risk conflict and bloodshedfor reasons not related to water.”International water law provides a valuable frameworkfor cooperation, and thus conflict prevention.Countries of the pan-European region, member states ofthe United Nations Economic Commission for Europe(UNECE), completed the negotiation of the Conventionon the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watersand International Lakes as the Soviet Union came to anend. The convention was adopted and signed by countriesin Helsinki in 1992 – which is why it is sometimescalled the Helsinki Convention – just as new bordersappeared with the dissolution of first the Soviet Unionand then Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. Rivers andlakes that had previously flowed within national bordersnow crossed new borders, and competing uses becameinternational rather than domestic affairs.The countries that subsequently joined the convention(the parties) recognized that the protection and useof transboundary watercourses and international lakesare important and urgent tasks, the effective accomplishmentof which can only be ensured by enhancedcooperation. They were also concerned over the existenceand threats of adverse effects, in the short or longterm, of changes in the conditions of transboundarywatercourses and international lakes on the environment,economies and well-being of countries.The convention therefore requires its parties totake all appropriate measures to prevent, controland reduce transboundary impacts, and to ensurethat transboundary waters are used in a reasonableand equitable way. But what brings into effect thesefine demands is the further requirement that riparianparties – countries that share a transboundaryriver or aquifer, or an international lake – establishjoint agreements that foresee joint bodies responsiblefor joint management. And this the parties andother countries have successfully done, negotiatingnew agreements across the pan-European region. Forexample, the convention has contributed to or servedas a model for the treaties on the Chu-Talas, Danube,Dniester, Drin, Narva , Sava and Rhine rivers, as wellas for agreements on the Kazakh-Russian, Russian-Ukrainian, Belarus-Russian, Belarus-Ukrainian,Russian-Mongolian and many other transboundarywaters. States have also established joint bodies –including for the rivers Danube, Elbe, Meuse, Oder[ 20 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYand Scheldt, and for the lakes Geneva, Ohrid and Peipsi – inspiredor influenced by the convention.An important strength of the convention lies in its institutionalframework that stems from its governing body, the Meeting of theParties, supported by intergovernmental working groups, task forcesand a permanent secretariat. That institutional framework assistsparties in the implementation and progressive development of theconvention, including through the exchange of experience andgood practices, elaboration of guidelines and recommendations, thedevelopment of legally-binding protocols and capacity development.In other words, a party is not left alone to implement the convention:its needs and expectations may be brought to the attention ofthe institutions that underpin the convention.UNECE is supporting parties and other states in implementing theconvention and establishing transboundary agreements, including inprevious conflict areas and unstable regions, such as the Sava and Drinriver basins in the former Yugoslavia, the Dniester River between theRepublic of Moldova and Ukraine, and the Kura River in the Caucasus.As of July 2013, 38 countries plus the European Union havejoined the convention, from Portugal in the west to Kazakhstanand the Russian Federation in the east; the most recent to join wasTurkmenistan, in 2012. (There are 56 member states of UNECE butseveral – notably some island states – do not share water resourceswith other member states.)These agreements and joint bodies are significant achievements,as are similar successes in many other transboundary basins aroundthe world, but many transboundary basins and aquifers worldwidestill lack such agreements and institutions. More efforts are neededto facilitate transboundary agreements and joint institutions for alltransboundary basins and aquifers, to provide strong and long-termtransboundary cooperation for the benefit of populations, economiesand nature. The convention provides a unique intergovernmentalplatform for those efforts.Back in 2003, the parties to the convention, realizing its effectivenessand that there was nothing specifically ‘European’ aboutits provisions, decided to amend it so that countries in otherregions of the world could also benefit from this valuable framework.This desire was echoed by Ban Ki-moon, United NationsSecretary-General, in 2012: “I encourage countries outsidethe UNECE region to join the convention and contribute to itsfurther development”. At last, after a decade’s wait, the amendmententered into force in February 2013, making a great start tothe United Nations International Year of Water Cooperation. It isexpected that countries outside the UNECE region will begin tojoin the convention in 2014.The International Year of Water Cooperation may also see the entryinto force of a second global treaty on transboundary water cooperation:the Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Usesof International Watercourses, negotiated by the United NationsInternational Law Commission and adopted by the General Assemblyin New York in 1997. These two treaties, with slightly differing buttotally complementary approaches to transboundary water cooperation,provide countries with a comprehensive legal framework forcooperation. At the time of writing, 30 countries from around theglobe had joined the New York Convention. Meanwhile, over 50countries from outside the UNECE region have already been involvedin activities under the Helsinki Convention and several of them haveexpressed interest in joining the convention. For example, in June2013, about 20 countries from Latin America and the Caribbeanjoined a workshop on the Helsinki Convention held inBuenos Aires. There is plainly a globalization both oftreaties and of interest in these treaties.Naturally, countries wish to understand the benefitsof transboundary water cooperation which, thoughthey may appear obvious, vary significantly accordingto many factors, including the upstream or downstreamposition, the levels of economic development and internationaltrade, and governance structures. To answercountries’ questions, work has begun under the HelsinkiConvention to produce guidance on the identification,quantification and communication of the wide range ofbenefits of transboundary water cooperation. By enablingthe identification of benefits to be shared in a broadersense – that is, benefits derived from the use of waterin the comprehensive understanding of the conventionincluding, for instance, use related to human health,economic and social aspects – rather than focusing onwater allocation only, this activity should also provideopportunities for further broadening cooperation.Some of the benefits of cooperation are well knownto the water policy community – such as health andMost of the rural population in the Caucasus and Central Asia lacksaccess to piped water on premisesImage: UNECE[ 21 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYbiodiversity benefits generated by reduced water pollution, microeconomicimpacts of improved water allocation (for example, foragricultural productivity) and economic gains from the developmentof large infrastructure for water storage, flood control or hydropowergeneration. Some of these benefits are manifest as reduced costs ofwater supply and power generation, or as reduced risks arising fromfloods, droughts and disease. Other benefits of cooperation are lesswell known – such as those related to reduced political tensions(ultimately leading to reduced defence spending), opening opportunitiesfor cooperation in other areas (such as trade liberalization) orthe macroeconomic impacts of improved water management facilitatedby cooperation.On one hand, it is clear that there are significant benefits fromcooperation. On the other, when countries fail to cooperate andinstead compete for use of the water resource, the costs can be high.Aquifers draw down due to competing pumping, crops die as flowsdip in the growing season and the land floods as water is releasedin the winter, ice flows disrupt navigation and power generation,polluted waters impact on the health of downstream communitiesand raise the costs of drinking water supply, reservoirs are silted upby sediments, and so on. Transboundary cooperation, based on theHelsinki and New York conventions, can help to prevent such costs.Besides providing information on the benefits of cooperationinternationally, water management – both nationally and in the transboundarycontext – needs intersectoral cooperation. A particularlysuccessful approach to fostering the sort of intersectoral cooperationthat forms an essential foundation for better water managementis embodied by the national policy dialogues on integrated waterresources management and water supply and sanitation, being heldwithin the European Union Water Initiative. UNECE – focusing onwater sector reforms to achieve integrated water resources management– is working with the Organization for Economic Cooperationand Development – which is focusing more on economic and financialanalyses – to implement these dialogues in ninecountries across Eastern Europe, the Caucasus andCentral Asia. The objective of each policy dialogue isto facilitate the reform of water policies in a particularcountry or region. Each policy dialogue involveshigh-level representatives of all key partners, includingnational and basin authorities, representatives of relevantinternational organizations, civil society (non-governmentalorganizations) and the private sector.The national policy dialogues have also provided aforum for discussions on the setting of national targetsrelating to safe drinking water and adequate sanitation,the subject of the Helsinki Convention’s Protocol onWater and Health. The protocol, adopted and signedby 35 states in London in 1999, now has 26 contractingparties in the UNECE region. Each party has to set, andsubsequently implement, targets in 20 areas coveringthe entire water cycle. For example, in relation to sanitation,target areas cover access to sanitation, the levelof performance of sanitation systems, the application ofrecognized good practices to the management of sanitation,and the disposal and reuse of sewage sludge fromsanitation systems.The process of target setting is flexible and adaptableto specific national conditions. Thus, the parties appreciatethe target setting and reporting process as a usefulpolicymaking and planning tool that enhances intersectoralcooperation – which is where the national policydialogue helps – and assists governments to expressclearly and transparently their priorities in progressingtowards universal access to safe water and sanitation.Both globally and in the UNECE region, advances inaccess to water and sanitation are being made. But safeImage: UNECEThe signing of the Treaty on the Dniester River Basin in Rome in 2012[ 22 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYdrinking water and improved sanitation cannot be taken for granted,even in the pan-European region. Overall progress in increasingaccess masks significant disparities within and between the countries,between urban and rural areas, as well as between high- andlow-income groups. Lower levels of access are evident among thepoor, those belonging to the most vulnerable and marginalizedgroups, and rural populations, regardless of a country’s socioeconomicstatus. For example, in the Caucasus and Central Asia, 19per cent of the rural population lacks access to improved drinkingwatersources as opposed to only 4 per cent of urban dwellers; moredramatically, 72 per cent of the rural population lacks access topiped water on premises, whereas only 20 per cent of town and cityresidents are similarly disadvantaged.These inequalities are recognized in the protocol, which requiresthat equitable access to water, adequate in terms of both quantityand quality, should be provided for all members of the population,especially those who suffer a disadvantage or social exclusion. Toaddress equity, a publication on good practices was developed,titled No One Left Behind. In addition, a practical self-assessmenttool, or scorecard, is to be launched at the third meeting of theprotocol’s governing body in November 2013, to help statesappraise the situation on national and subnational levels and toidentify the priority areas for action to reduce disparities in accessto water and sanitation.The institutional arrangements under the Helsinki Convention,with regular intergovernmental meetings and numerous technicalworkshops, provide a similar platform for addressing emerging issues.Several years ago, work began on adaptation to climate changein transboundary basins. The Helsinki Convention has beensupporting countries in jointly adapting their water managementto climate change since the preparation of a pioneering guidancedocument in 2007-2009. Since 2010, the use of the guidance wassupported through a programme of pilot projects and a platformfor exchanging experience on climate change adaptation in transboundarybasins. Thanks to this work, the need for transboundarycooperation in climate change adaptation has been increasinglyrecognized. More and more countries sharing transboundarybasins are starting to address these issues jointly. This has ledto concrete results. For example, a pilot project on river basinmanagement and climate change adaptation in the Neman RiverBasin has resulted in a joint assessment of water resources andclimate change impacts in the basin, thereby enabling a renewalof cooperation between the riparian countries on the sharedriver basin. In the Dniester River pilot project, a first basin-wideimpact and vulnerability assessment has been developed, as wellas detailed flood risk modelling in two priority sites.In 2013-2015, a collection of lessons learned and good practiceswill be prepared, the programme of pilot projects will betransformed into a global network of basins working on climatechange adaptation and a global platform for exchanging experienceis being established. In February 2013, a first meeting washeld of the global network of rivers basins on climate changeadaptation. The network of basins currently includes the basins ofthe Chu Talas, Congo, Danube, Dniester, Drin, Mekong, Meuse,Neman, Niger, Rhine, Sava, Senegal and Upper Paraguay rivers,the Amur/Argun/Daursky Biosphere Reserve and the NorthernSahara aquifer system.The newest area of work under the Helsinki Convention is onassessing the water-food-energy-ecosystems nexus in transbound-ary basins. The nexus is where these sectors cometogether and compete, and where trade-offs are made.By better understanding the interactions between water,food, energy and ecosystems in transboundary basins,it is expected that synergies can be strengthened andpolicies made more coherent, with the aim of reducingconflicts, promoting sustainability and helping toaddress and reduce trade-offs between these key sectors.The legal framework provided by the Helsinki andNew York conventions, and the numerous policytools and good practices developed under the HelsinkiConvention and its Protocol on Water and Health, showthat solutions are available. They show that, with thepolitical will and with opportunities for open dialogue,transboundary water cooperation can be the norm. Theyshow also that countries can work together to addresssome of our greatest challenges, such as climate changeand peaceful relations between neighbouring countries.And the Protocol on Water and Health providesa unique international legal framework for translatingthe human right to safe drinking water and sanitationinto a reality.Water infrastructure can have multiple uses including hydropowergeneration and flow regulationImage: UNECE[ 23 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYGreater cooperation through water diplomacyand transboundary water managementJulia Marton-Lefèvre, Patrick MacQuarrie, Alejandro Iza and Mark Smith,International Union for Conservation of NatureWith over 275 transboundary basins on the planet,cooperation over water management is essentialfor the preservation of freshwater biodiversity andhealthy ecosystems. Approximately 40 per cent of the world’spopulation lives in river and lake basins that comprise two ormore countries and, perhaps more significantly, over 90 percent lives in countries that share basins. The complexities ofsharing water between and among nations require innovation inapproaches to water governance, with water diplomacy at multiplelevels. In this regard water is unique. It connects fishermento Prime Ministers, farmers to politicians, through a simple yetchallenging common objective – to cooperatively manage ourshared freshwater ecosystems and maintain the rich biodiversitythat supports useful and productive livelihoods.The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)contributes to the conservation of water biodiversity by promoting,influencing and catalysing sustainable use andequitable sharing of resources, as well as protectingecosystems. Promoting cooperation among countriesin the management of transboundary waters is a keybuilding block in protecting biodiversity while maintaininginternational security and regional stability.At the same time, water management is a local activitybecause clean, safe and dependable water supplyis intrinsic to the health, food security and economicopportunities needed for households and communitiesto benefit from development. Failing to managewater sustainably results in losses of biodiversity, withdirect negative impacts on poverty, disease, conflictand development.Biodiversity is crucial to the reduction of poverty.More than 1.3 billion people depend on biodiversityand on basic ecosystem goods and services for theirImage: ©IUCN\Carla VaucherIn the Lake Titicaca basin, BRIDGE focused on fostering dialogue and cooperation through agreements on knowledge and information[ 24 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYlivelihoods. Inland water ecosystems are subjected to massivechanges due to multiple pressures, and biodiversity is lost morerapidly than in other types of ecosystem. More integrated managementof freshwater ecosystems will help reduce negative impactsfrom competing pressures.Protecting biodiversity depends on sustainable water management.This requires good governance which, in turn, requireswater governance capacity. Without governance capacity, evengiven the greatest political will and motivation, poor managementpractices can persist leading to ecosystem degradation and reducedlivelihoods. To build governance capacity, effective tools need toprovide a sustainable connection between ecosystems and thosemanaging them. Water diplomacy bridges the gap between sustainablemanagement practices, good governance and water users atmultiple levels.Water governance and cooperationWater governance sets the ‘rules of the game’ for the way wateris managed. It determines how, or whether, water resources aremanaged sustainably. Poor water governance results in loss ofbiodiversity through degradation and over-allocation of waterresources, and leads to weaker and less resilient livelihoods andeconomic growth.Policies, laws and institutions are the three pillars of water governancewithin a country and in a transboundary basin, where they arecomplemented by the agreements negotiated between basin countries.For this governance to be effective, countries need to developtheir own water governance capacity through transparent, coherentand cost-efficient policies, laws and institutions.Experience from the IUCN Water and Nature Initiative showsthat water governance capacity is built most effectively where allstakeholders participate, with coordination at local, national andtransboundary levels.In practical terms, the coordinated development and reform ofpolicies, laws and institutions needed to build this capacity takesplace through the integration of several elements:• demonstrating tangible benefits from improved water resourcemanagement for social and economic development at local,national or river basin level• learning, capacity building and knowledge exchange amongdecision makers and stakeholders• multi-stakeholder dialogues and forums to build consensus andcoordinate decisions• support for national policy, legal and institutional reforms• international cooperation in transboundary basins.Water diplomacyEver since two Sumerian city-states signed the first known watertreaty in 2500 BC ending a water dispute along the Tigris River,water has been the subject of cooperation more often than conflict.Today, over 3,600 international water treaties exist.Water diplomacy enables countries to negotiate agreements onwater management. The importance of water for development andpoverty reduction at local levels means that agreements amongnational governments often do not lead, by themselves, to implementation.For transboundary agreements on water managementto work on the ground, they need the agreement of water usersat multiple levels of governance. Water diplomacy should be aprocess which operates under the authority of sovereign nationalIn the Sixaola basin, shared between Panama and Costa Rica, effortsto improve water governance capacity are paying offgovernments, requiring their ultimate agreement,but which also unlocks cooperation among multiplestakeholders, including municipalities and provinces.Working broadly as a multi-level governanceprocess, water diplomacy can better integrate governments’priorities for national resource security andeconomic growth while providing a means to integratebiodiversity conservation into frameworks forwater management.Water management is also a technical issue that isstrengthened by scientific knowledge and information.Effective water diplomacy is therefore the art ofbuilding and facilitating the convergence of technicalexpertise, information, stakeholder dialogue and localand international politics. It calls on national and localpoliticians, decision makers, scientific and technicalexperts to work together toward negotiated agreementson policies, laws and institutions that can be implementedfor transboundary water management.Building bridges for water cooperationIUCN’s Building River Dialogue and Governance(BRIDGE) project strengthens transboundary watercooperation by incorporating the interests of multiplestakeholders into dialogue and negotiation overtransboundary waters, enhancing participation andbuilding agreement between water users. This createsan environment and capacity where governments andstakeholders can work together to address priorities atlocal, national and regional levels. Water cooperationcan then deliver a broader set of solutions than is likelythrough negotiations constrained to high-level, stateto-stateprocesses.Image: ©IUCN\Nazareth Porras[ 25 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYWater diplomacy in practiceBRIDGE operates in six basins in Latin America – three inMesoamerica and three in the Andes in South America – and threesub-basins in South-East Asia. In Mesoamerica BRIDGE has demonstrationprojects in the Coatan (Guatemala-Mexico), Goascorán(Honduras-El Salvador) and Sixaola (Costa Rica-Panama) basins. Inthe Andes, BRIDGE project sites are in the Zarumilla (Peru-Ecuador),Catamayo-Chira (Peru-Ecuador) and Titicaca (Peru-Bolivia) basins.While the basins have distinct differences within and across regions,there are key strategic similarities in how water diplomacy worksacross all of the project’s transboundary basins. BRIDGE also operatesin South-East Asia on three transboundary tributaries of theMekong River: the Sekong (Viet Nam-Lao People’s DemocraticRepublic (PDR)-Cambodia), the Sre Pok (Viet Nam-Cambodia),and the Sesan (Viet Nam-Cambodia).BRIDGE has been particularly active in Latin America. In theGoascorán basin shared between Honduras and El Salvador, IUCNhas worked with partners and stakeholders to revitalize a basinmanagement group responsible for joint planning and management,constituting a major step forward in cooperation betweenthe two countries. Key to the success of this effort was the inclusionCooperation catches on in the GoascoránThe goal in the Goascorán watershed is to integrate transboundarywatershed management into broader efforts to improve local livelihoods.“We start from the assumption that water governance alone is notsustainable,” says Luis Maier from Fundación Vida. “Good watermanagement is a function of good land management in a larger sense, onethat includes issues like job creation.”The Goascorán is shared between El Salvador and HondurasImage: ©IUCN\Manuel Farriasof stakeholder groups in the planning body – greatlyincreasing its legitimacy, status and footprint byincluding local development agencies, national levelministries and private actors. Through these actions,BRIDGE provided essential support for the formationof a new transboundary committee which aims todevelop the financial and institutional model for thebasin – ensuring that the institutional arrangementis sustainable long-term. This is a powerful exampleof how strengthening stakeholder participation cantransform weak institutions into legitimate bodies ofgovernance while enhancing cooperation in a transboundarycontext.Similarly, efforts to increase cooperation andimprove water governance capacity in the Sixaolabasin are paying off. The basin is shared by Panamaand Costa Rica, and the Permanent BinationalCommission has managed cross-border relationsbetween the two countries for some time. However,technical and legal constraints have meant that theinstitution was unable initiate activities in the watershedthat would enable the establishment of theSixaola Basin Commission. BRIDGE worked with thePermanent Binational Commission, the governmentsof Panama and Costa Rica, partners in the region andthe IUCN Environmental Law Centre to help clarifythe role of the Sixaola Basin Commission, draftingbylaws and clarifying statutes to enable it to operateand function as a transboundary basin committee.Following this, BRIDGE was asked to support preparationof a Code of Conduct for the Sixaola Basin thatwould emphasize the principles of integrated waterresources management and meet the requirementsof the Panamanian and Costa Rican governments.Working across multiple scales with multiple stakeholders,water diplomacy in action again delivered amajor step forward in institutionalizing cooperationat the basin level and preparing the foundation fora functioning transboundary river basin commission.BRIDGE’s work in the Andes has focused moreon creating shared data and information platforms,reforming existing institutional structuresand building transboundary governance and watermanagement capacities in institutions at the nationallevel. Significantly, achievements by the ZarumillaCommission have served as a model for cooperationbetween Peru and Ecuador, directly influencing waterpolicy in both countries. Successes in the Zarumillabasin have strengthened confidence to a point whereboth presidents have signed a declaration agreeingto establish further transboundary basin commissionsin the Catamayo-Chira and Puyango-Tumbesbasins, where the BRIDGE project is active. As aresult communities, municipalities and state institutionshave begun the process of dialogue and workingtogether to establish new relationships, improvecommunication and formulate agreements acrossmultiple levels of water users, technical experts andpublic officials.[ 26 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYIn the Lake Titicaca basin shared by Peru and Bolivia, BRIDGEhas focused on fostering dialogue and cooperation through agreementson knowledge and information. BRIDGE facilitated directcollaboration between the national hydrometeorological institutesof Bolivia and Peru to develop a water information systemand management platform. While cooperating on maps and datasharing, a dialogue on management of the lake system was begun,involving the Lake Titicaca Authority, national water agencies ofPeru and Bolivia and, for the first time, municipalities and localstakeholders. While working to widen stakeholder involvement,BRIDGE responded to requests from Peru and Bolivia for trainingon the principles of transboundary water governance. Bothsides, supported by BRIDGE, agreed that fundamental reform ofthe Lake Titicaca Authority was needed, to make it a more representativeand effective transboundary basin organization that bothimplements technical projects and takes the lead on promotingcooperation through multi-level participation and effective transboundarywater resource management.Steps toward greater cooperationTo build water diplomacy in practice, BRIDGE uses a basic frameworkof demonstrations and multi-stakeholder participation thatintegrates five elements:• Demonstration – demonstrating and testing ways to makecooperation operational in a basin as the basis for confidenceand trust building, shared learning and joint action to buildnational and transboundary water governance capacity• Learning – training and capacity building in water governance,international water law and benefit sharing for multiplestakeholders at municipal, civil society and national levels• Dialogue for consensus building – using demonstrationsand learning events to catalyse new dialogues on technical,development and political matters• Leadership – supporting champions who can effectivelyadvocate for the mobilization of water diplomacy fortransboundary water cooperation and better water governance• Advisory/support facilities – providing advice and technicalassistance on water governance to governments and stakeholders,including effective institutional and legal frameworks, promotingthe application of lessons learned and demonstrating results inregional and global transboundary hotspots.By demonstrating how water diplomacy functions at the local level, thefirst phase of BRIDGE showed that local-level cooperation can be scaledup to reach multiple levels. The second phase strengthens this approachby reinforcing demonstrations of cooperation at the watershed leveland, recognizing that formal agreements require the legitimacy andauthority of states, placing more emphasis and resources on capacitybuilding and technical support at the national level.Additionally, many regional institutions are playing a larger rolein promoting cooperation through transboundary water governance.The second phase of BRIDGE seeks to intervene in new entry pointswith regional organizations such as the Association of SoutheastAsian Nations, the Andean Community of Nations and the CentralAmerican Integration System, emphasizing the principles of integratedwater resources management and international water law.Further developing cooperation through local leadership andadvocacy of transboundary water management, BRIDGE willcontinue to support and develop the Champions Network topromote exchange and empower local stakeholders.Local actors have a potentially tremendous influenceon cooperation in transboundary watersheds, creatingplatforms for sharing knowledge and experience andreinforcing sustainable practices on water management,thus putting water diplomacy into practice onthe ground. By continuing to build and strengthen goodwater governance through water diplomacy, water usershave the basic building blocks for cooperation on watersupply, quality and protecting ecosystems, therebypreserving the rich biodiversity on which their healthand livelihoods depend.The Champions Network: locally driventransboundary cooperationA Champions Network meeting in San Marcos, GuatemalaThe Champions Network was created to promote exchangeand empower local stakeholders in transboundary watercooperation. “Water diplomacy has to happen under theauthority of national governments, but water accords need theagreement of local users,” says Mark Smith, Director of theGlobal Water Programme at IUCN.Shortly after their first regional meeting in May 2012, leadcoordinator Mitzela Dávila and 14 network members – fromfour transboundary regions and eight countries in Mesoamerica– decided to recruit reticent local officials into discussions overshared national watershed management. The group adoptedthe slogan ‘vamos pa´lante’ (‘Let’s get moving’).“They agreed that they had to get the mayors to come to theirnext regional meeting,” recalls Rocio Córdoba, coordinator ofthe Livelihoods and Climate Change Unit of IUCN’s regionalheadquarters in San José, Costa Rica. “Mostly vice-mayorsshowed up – but even that was remarkable given theprevious lack of interest by local officials and the fact thatmost of them had to travel hundreds of kilometres from theirhome countries to Guatemala, where the meeting was held.”In the Las Tablas community of the Sixaola River basin, whereDávila lives, a representative of the Champions Network hasbeen invited to sit on an important transboundary committee,creating a link between this official body and the communitiesaffected by its decisions. “Since we have someone on thecommission, we know what is going on,” says Dávila. “We can goto a community and tell them what the commission is doing. Andwe can take information from them back to the commission.”Initial successes have fuelled more enthusiasm and evengreater ambitions. “In our meetings, we have shown that we areunited as a network,” says Dávila. “We think we can work at aneven higher level – at the regional level or even beyond.”Image: ©IUCN\Mitzela Davila[ 27 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYFrom the Dead Sea to an Israel/PalestineWater Accord: 20 years of water diplomacyin the Middle EastGidon Bromberg, Nader Khateeb and Munqeth Mehyar, Co-Directors, EcoPeace/Friends of the Earth Middle EastEcoPeace/Friends of the Earth Middle East (FoEME) isa unique organization that in 1994 for the very firsttime brought together Palestinian, Jordanian and Israelienvironmentalists to work together under a single board. Overthe past 20 years the organization has grown from an allvoluntarystaff working out of rooms in the offices of otherorganizations, to opening its own offices in Bethlehem, Ammanand Tel-Aviv where today 80 paid professional staff membersare employed and hundreds of volunteers involved. In thistimespan the organization has reinvented itself in the face ofsignificant shifts in political and social moods in the region.At the same time, it has learned to combine multiple models ofaction in order to pursue what has become its primary focussince the early years of the millennium – a water diplomacydesigned to promote a just and sustainable cross-border cooperationover shared water resources.At the launch of the first United Nations Water Talks, on 24April 2012, United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization Director-General Irina Bokova called for a renewedcommitment to water diplomacy: “We need new forms of waterdiplomacy – to integrate multiple perspectives and resolve problemsin ways that are informed by science and technology and thatfavour intercultural dialogue”. 1 Over the past 20 years, FoEME hascontinuously leveraged its experience for the creation of a waterdiplomacy based on scientific expertise, top-down advocacy andbottom-up community-led action. Its aim has been resolving sharedwater problems in sustainable ways both between peoples andbetween people and nature in the midst of a conflict-ridden region.FoEME was founded at a time of optimism, when there was beliefin a process that people thought would shortly result in comprehensivepeace. Since obtaining ‘peace’ was considered doable, theorganization focused on the quality of peace from an environmentalperspective. Its literature from that time highlighted the phrase‘sustainable peace’, reflecting its belief that the peace being forgedby our governments was ecologically unsustainable.A classic environmental top-down advocacy organization at itsinception, FoEME was predominately involved during these firstyears in leading efforts for developing sustainable livelihoods. Thework of the organization was focused on protecting the environmentfrom the lack of cross-border cooperation related to conflict,and from overdevelopment being proposed within the frameworkof advancing the peace process.During this period the organization advanced itsobjective of leading ‘sustainable peace’ focused on traditionalavenues of cross-border environmental advocacy.It saw an urgent need to advocate processes of sustainabledevelopment, balancing the needs of people andnature, but recognizing that only a regional effort couldresult in the issue being placed on the political agendaof the Arab/Israeli peace process. From the early daysof the organization, creating a common vision around ashared ecosystem by bringing together experts from thethree countries involved was recognized as a necessaryfirst step for advocacy purposes.The lack of such a vision for the Dead Sea was oneof FoEME’s first major concerns. As part of the effortsto promote regional peace and prosperity, the Dead Seawas marked by the region’s governments as a site forrapid development holding great economic potential.Among other proposals were the building of a conduitto fill with seawater, 50,000 new hotel rooms aroundit; an international eight-lane highway proposed alongthe Jordan Valley; and increased water extraction forthe use of the potash industry.Understanding that such developments might resultin considerable ecological damage to this uniqueecosystem, FoEME held two conferences during 1996in Amman and Tel Aviv titled ‘The Dead Sea – FutureChallenges’. These conferences highlighted the lack ofcoordination in planning processes between Israelis,Palestinians and Jordanians, and the need for crossbordercooperation in creating a unified vision for thesustainable development of the Dead Sea. As FoEME’sefforts at that time were mainly directed at developingsustainable livelihoods, the question guiding theseefforts within the context of the Dead Sea was how thepolitical, economic and development activities in placecan be altered so as to strike a more balanced approachboth between the peoples sharing the ecosystem andbetween the needs of people and the needs of nature.The period of pursuing sustainable peace, however,came to an end by 1998, when the belief that peace wasindeed within reach had faded in the face of the OsloAccords’ failure to stand up to people’s expectations.The peace process had by then became so sour that the[ 28 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYviolence, loss of hope and trust and that it must speakto the immediate concerns of people. While FoEME’sseries of policy papers on protecting the MountainAquifer from sewage and solid waste pollution reflectthe continued top-down advocacy work carried out atthis time, the idea of complementing these top-downadvocacy efforts with bottom-up community-led activismwas born sometime during this interim phase. Bycoincidence, when funding was finally secured forthe Good Water Neighbors project in late 2000, thenew cross-border community-based effort was almostcancelled with the outbreak of all-out violence in 2001.Funders believed that cross-border efforts were nolonger viable. However, FoEME was able to convincefunders that community-level cooperation was possibleand the project was launched in early 2001, initiallyinvolving 11 communities – five Palestinian, five Israeliand one Jordanian.The inception of the Good Water Neighbors projectmarked the beginning of the third phase of FoEME’swork and launched the process of consolidating its waterdiplomacy. The organization had realized that in orderto remain relevant, it had to complement its top-downapproach with grass-roots actions undertaken throughdialogue, confidence building and cooperation activitiesfocused on actual cross-border resources that coulddirectly benefit people. The project was designed to raiseawareness of the shared water problems of Palestinian,Jordanian and Israeli communities, and harness residentsand municipal staff to the task of changing reality on theground. Based on identifying cross-border communitiesand utilizing their mutual dependence on shared waterresources as a basis for developing dialogue and cooperaterm‘peace process’ itself was associated with negative connotationsof increased violence and preserving the status quo. The ensuingchanges in political conditions, public opinion and national moodamong the three peoples have cast FoEME into a period of greatturmoil both internally and externally. The overdevelopment thathad been proposed by the governments was now seen as a pipedream, not within reach and no longer politically relevant. FoEMEitself was increasingly being condemned and attacked as an armof this failed peace effort. In what can be seen now as a transitionperiod lasting until 2001, FoEME began focusing on how therenewed conflict was holding the need to more fairly allocate sharedwaters hostage to the lack of advancement of the peace process.As part of this change, FoEME started to use its experience inaddressing cross-border water issues to shape a coherent water diplomacydesigned to implement adaptive methods of joint managementand allocation of shared waters, thus transforming shared watersfrom a source of conflict into one of cooperation. This approach wasbased on the understanding that all parties involved in the regionshould be convinced that water is a flexible resource, and that “byusing processes and mechanisms to focus on building and enhancingtrust, even countries in conflict can reach agreements that satisfytheir citizens’ water needs and their national interests”. 2FoEME’s early work on the issues of sustainable development ofthe Dead Sea can now be seen as an important milestone in theshaping of the organization’s water diplomacy during this interimperiod. The need for cross-border cooperation to create a holisticvision for a shared natural resource for the sake of the medium andlong-term interests of the three peoples has remained a basic principleof its work on all shared waters in the region – albeit now asa challenge to create in the midst of continued occupation, conflictand violence. But even prior to the outbreak of the Second Intifadain 2001, FoEME understood that medium and long-term interestswere not sufficiently relevant in the midst of ever-increasingImage: FoEMEImage: FoEMEFoEME’s community projects and advocacy efforts brought mayors from Israel,Jordan and Palestine to an event in the Jordan River, with a clear and joint messageto their governments: “Rehabilitate the Jordan River!”FoEME’s “Good Water Neighbors” project brings neighbouringPalestinian and Israeli Mayors to sign on an MoU to cooperate overshared water issues[ 29 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYtion on sustainable water management, the project today includes 28communities (11 Palestinian, nine Israeli and eight Jordanian). Whenoriginally launched, the Good Water Neighbors project struggled toconvince the 11 original participating communities that they wouldbenefit through the cooperative activities launched. Today FoEMEhas more communities seeking to join the project than funds availableto enable their participation.The project has also supported the expanding geographical reachof the organization. Working in communities all along the bordersbetween the three peoples has brought FoEME to deal with waterissues relevant to all of the region’s shared water resources: the DeadSea, the Jordan River, cross-border creeks, and the Mountain andCoastal Aquifers.Having to deal with the conflicting and competing political,economic and social interests that exist both within each communityand society and between cross-border communities and societieshas made this third era far more integrative than ever before. Thisperiod reflects the very action-oriented approach of the organizationas it exists today, having to show concrete results and benefits onan almost daily basis in order to maintain the trust of residents andcommunity leaders. During the last 12 years FoEME has successfullyovercome the barrier of showing how communities can andare presently able to benefit from the cooperative relations establisheddespite the continued conflict – politically, economically andsocially, often all interlinked.Through the synergy created within its water diplomacy by combiningtop-down with bottom-up strategies, FoEME can today identifya host of major achievements. One of its major successes has been inplacing the key regional issues of saving the Dead Sea and rehabilitatingthe Jordan River on the decision-making table. In recent years,to a large extent as a result of FoEME’s efforts, the various wateragencies of Israel, Palestine and Jordan have started to recognize theecological, social, and economic importance of restoring the flow andquality of Jordan River waters – the diversion and pollution of whichare primary factors in the demise of the Dead Sea. No less importantly,FoEME is a leading advocate for the recognition of Palestinian rightsto Jordan River waters and the importance of the Jordan Valley forthe Palestinian state. The civil society water diplomacy of FoEMEhas had a significant role in this change in perception, evident inmaster plans and water plans now being prepared, with fresh waterflowing again from the Sea of Galilee to the river for the first time in50 years, though still in insufficient quantities. Together with freshwaterrelease, no less importantly, sewage is coming out with progressmade on sewage treatment plants on all sides of the Jordan Valley.Furthermore, FoEME is starting to see the results of its advocacyefforts impacting cross-border water management institutions. On 7February 2013, for the very first time since the signing of the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty in 1994, the bilateral Israeli-Jordanian Joint WaterCommittee discussed the rehabilitation of Jordan River.Addressing water supply and sanitation issues has also been afocus of the Good Water Neighbors project. FoEME has so farleveraged over US$450 million invested or earmarked for the participatingcommunities – primarily as investments in water supply andsanitation projects, as well as in environmental education centersand ecotourism projects.The combination of top-down advocacy and bottom-up communitybasedaction, as the basis for FoEME’s water diplomacy, was built onthe understanding that cross-border cooperation at the communitylevel – between residents, professionals and municipal representatives– is instrumental in the building of trust, which must bethe basis for conflict resolution. Moreover, since FoEME’scommunity-led project is based on raising communities’awareness of their mutual dependence as regards waterissues, and their self-interests in cooperating over water, itis a powerful tool in changing reality on the ground. Whilechanging the parties’ perceptions of each other is no lessimportant to the creation of intercultural dialogue, emphasizingself-interests that, if fulfilled, would yield mutualgains is a necessity in order to generate concrete actionand political will. FoEME’s community-based activities areshaped to complement its top-down advocacy efforts bycreating and empowering this will among local residents,in a way that would impact both municipal representativesand politicians, and influence the media and the broaderpublic’s opinion as a result.The same understanding of the need to identify selfinterestadvancing mutual gain is at the heart of FoEME’sendeavours on the national level, to promote a finalIsraeli-Palestinian Water Accord. Under the Oslo process,solving water issues has been held hostage to the failure toadvance agreements on the other core issues of the peaceprocess. Current management of water resources sharedbetween Israel and Palestine – the principles of whichwere partly laid by the Oslo II accords – is detrimentalto the interests of both parties. As Oslo II was signed asan interim agreement and not a final status accord, thearrangement for the joint management of the MountainAquifer – the only shared resource the agreement hasdealt with – was meant to last for only five years. Dueto the defunct political process it is still in place 20 yearslater, and failing to facilitate effective joint managementand allocation of shared waters. Palestinians are not beingsupplied with water resources sufficient to their basicneeds, and Israelis and Palestinians together are witnessingthe pollution of increasing amounts of shared waters.Given the dire Palestinian need for more water availability,Israel’s new water supply due to large scale desalinationand waste water reuse and a joint need to deal withuntreated sewage, restarting negotiations with water as afirst priority makes economic, ecological and, not leastimportantly, political sense. Israel is today a country withexcess water at its disposal, making the sharing of naturalwaters more equitably no longer a win-lose situation forIsraelis. A final water accord could enable both leadershipsto present significant gains as it would greatly improve thecurrent living conditions of both peoples. For Palestinians,it would increase freshwater availability in every home; forIsraelis, it would remove pollutants from rivers and creeksthat flow through its main cities.FoEME has drafted a Model Accord delineating a possiblemechanism to replace the current Israeli-PalestinianJoint Water Committee, one which would facilitatesustainable and equitable joint management and allocationof all shared water resources in the region. The ideaof a water accord as a potential breakthrough in the politicalprocess is currently promoted by FoEME within theregion’s governments and the international diplomaticcommunity, as our latest effort in water diplomacy.[ 30 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYTransboundary water diplomacyin the Mekong regionDr John Dore, Senior Regional Water Resources Sector Specialist, Australian Agency for International Development,Laos; and Dr Louis Lebel, Director, Unit for Social and Environmental Research, Chiang Mai University, ThailandWater resources lie at the heart of development inthe Mekong region – the territory, ecosystems,people, economies and politics of Cambodia, Laos,Myanmar, Thailand, Viet Nam and China’s Yunnan Provinceare home to about 260 million people. Future quality of lifein the region is strongly linked to the choices made aboutsharing, developing and managing water to produce foodand energy, maintain vital ecosystems and sustain livelihoods.Many water resource projects have been completed,are underway or are being planned. Dams, river diversions,inter-basin transfers, thirsty cities and irrigation expansionare all in the mix. While some projects have been celebrated,others are subject to disputes and protests. The transboundaryand interconnected nature of the Mekong’s waters addsa critical dimension.There are many rivers in the Mekong region, but the iconic MekongRiver is at the centre of current debates about water resource developmentin the wider region. It is the longest river in South-East Asiaand the eighth largest by flow volume in the world.Leaders of Mekong countries are aware that their countries’ destiniesare entwined. Those destinies will be partly shaped by theextension of increased cooperation into the realm of water resourcesdevelopment on the Mekong River and other transboundary riverssuch as the Irrawaddy, Salween and Red. The Mekong region’s waterscapesare being contested, demonstrating a confrontation of interestsand world views that are hard to reconcile despite a fresh rhetoricof trade-offs, benefit sharing and win-win solutions. Dams that are‘powering progress’ and publicly justified by reference to developmentaspirations and poverty alleviation might well, simultaneously,jeopardize food security and the livelihoods of the poorest.There is additional uncertainty from external forces that shapethe future of the region. For example, climate change is expectedto affect river flows and agricultural potential. Global economicgrowth and contraction will also influence the final outcome ofmany Mekong-made decisions. Dealing with uncertainty is the fateof most decision makers, not only those taking water resources decisions.Yet, because of the way it interconnects people’s livelihoodsand ecosystems, the complexity of water has particular importance.The interests of investors, officials in government agencies andsmall, local users of water such as fishers and farmers or distantcity dwellers needing energy, are visible – or not – dependingon how Mekong arenas are configured and controlled. There arevery different ways of valuing and prioritizing uses and users. Someprivilege flood protection and energy production services, others themeeting of farmer needs in the dry season and securingvaluable fisheries. Governments at various levels arethe main transboundary water governance actors in theMekong region. But, as elsewhere, there is a plethora ofothers jostling for space in decision-making arenas: nongovernmentorganizations, media, business, financiers,policy research institutes, universities and networks.Among these are the Mekong River Commission (MRC),M-POWER network and Save the Mekong coalition.MRC has a contested mandate – embodied in the 1995Mekong River Agreement – for the mainstream, tributariesand lands of the basin within the territories of the fourlower Mekong countries – Laos, Thailand, Cambodiaand Viet Nam. It also now includes the two upper countries– China and Myanmar – in some of its activitiesand outreach. Development partners and other cooperatinginstitutions also play a role in the MRC. This Mekongcooperation was originally catalysed through the UnitedNations and has more than 50 years of history. Article 1of the Agreement commits the four member countries tocooperate in all fields of sustainable development, utilization,management and conservation of the Mekong RiverBasin in fields such as irrigation, hydropower, navigation,flood control and fisheries.MRC is led by a governing Council at ministerial levelwhich meets once per year, and a Joint Committee (JC) ofsenior government officials which meets formally twiceper year and informally as the need arises. The Counciland JC are serviced by the MRC Secretariat (MRCS),which is responsible for implementing council and JCdecisions, advising and providing technical and administrativesupport. Although not specifically mentionedin the agreement, there are also National MekongCommittees (NMCs) established in each membercountry, set up differently in each country dependingon national government preferences. The heads of theNMCs represent their countries on the JC. NMCs areserviced by NMC Secretariats (NMCSs) and shouldprovide access to MRC issues by a range of line agencies.There is a political dynamic between each of thesefive parts – that is, there is no homogeneous singleMRC. Any joint position needs to be collectively negotiatedbetween the council and JC members. Moreover,the MRCS must also manage its working relationshipswith the NMCSs, which are quick to object if they feel[ 31 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYleft out of MRCS activities or perceive the MRCS to encroach ontheir national space. In turn, the NMCSs must also establish theirown role and working space within their national polities, with theirfunctional power much less than key water-related ministries andagencies in each country. As in any large family, it is not possiblefor all the interaction to be smooth. The vaunted ‘Mekong spirit’ ofcooperation often seems optimistically overstated; but that is notto deny the importance of doing everything possible to encouragea constructive spirit between the countries sharing precious waterresources, risks and opportunities.The M-POWER network has been working since 2004 implementinga Mekong Program for Water Environment and Resilience. Thevision for the network is for the region to realize an internationallyaccepted standard of democracy in water governance. A coreobjective is to make it normal practice for important national andtransnational water-related options and decisions to be examinedin the public sphere; another is to support the development ofgovernance analysts with experience across the region. M-POWERtakes a broad view of democratization, interpreted as encompassingissues of public participation and deliberation; separation ofpowers; accountability of public institutions; social and genderjustice; protection of rights; representation; decentralization; anddissemination of information. Network members believe that actionresearch,facilitated dialogues and stronger knowledge networksOrganization of the Mekong River CommissionGovernment ofCambodiaDonor ConsultativeGroupDevelopmentpartners and othercooperatingorganizationsGovernment ofLao PDRGovernment ofChinaCouncilMembers atMinisterial andCabinet levelGovernment ofThailandJoint CommitteeMembers at Headof Department levelor higherMRC SecretariatTechnical andadministrative armDialogue PartnersGovernment ofMyanmarGovernment ofViet NamNational MekongCommittees (NMCs)NMC SecretariatsLine agenciesThe organizational structure of the Mekong River Commission entails manyelements in a complex political dynamicSource: Mekong River Commissioncan help societies explore and adaptively reform watergovernance – rather than assuming that a single modelfits all social and resource contexts.From the outset, M-POWER made a deliberate choice tofocus on the wider region, including several internationaland many domestic river basins, rather than to overly focuson the Mekong River Basin and thereby frame too much ‘in’or ‘out’ of different political arenas. The first major publicM-POWER cooperation was in November 2004 whennetwork members convened, facilitated and providedcatalytic knowledge inputs to a high-level roundtable on‘Using Water, Caring for Environment: Challenges for theMekong region’ at the World Conservation Congress inBangkok. The event included ministers from five Mekongcountries (all but Myanmar) as well as non-state actors.Sensitive issues were tabled for discussion – inter-basinwater diversions into Thailand, Salween hydropowerdevelopment in China’s Yunnan province, and threatsto the Tonle Sap ecosystem that would be disastrous forCambodia. At the time this was a significant achievement,specifically bringing China, Lower Mekong governmentsand non-state actors into the same arena. The event servedto register the Salween hydropower, Thailand grid andTonle Sap threats as transboundary issues of high importancewhich deserved to be the subject of multi-country,multi-stakeholder deliberation.Oppositional advocacy in (parts of) the Mekongregion is well-developed. Local, national or transnationalnetworks of activists that are organized to resistdominant institutions, interests and discourses can playa significant role in decision-making or decision-influencingprocesses. Under the slogan ‘Our River FeedsMillions’, the Save the Mekong coalition’s campaignis catalysed and galvanized by the resurgent interestin planned dams for the Lower Mekong mainstream.Campaign supporters argue that these dams poseextraordinary threats to local livelihoods, biodiversityand natural heritage as the flip-side to energy andincome benefits. The campaign has successfully raisedthe profile of dam decision-making by Mekong governmentsthrough the strategic use of photography, media,letter-writing and direct representation. For example,more than 23,000 signatures were attached to a petitionwarning of the negative consequences of LowerMekong mainstream dams, sent to the Prime Ministersof Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Viet Nam on 19October 2009. Due to strategic and persistent advocacysince 2009, word of the campaign has also reacheddistant parliaments in places such as the United Statesand Australia.The Save the Mekong coalition has succeeded inheightening the understanding of risks to ecosystemsand livelihoods, and is pressing governments – both inand outside the Mekong region – to take their responsibilitiesfor project-affected people and nature seriously.A major achievement of the campaign has been tosucceed, despite available science being inconclusive,in reframing the perceived dams threats from environmentalprotection to food security and the potential[ 32 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYImage: K G HortleA Mekong river fisherman at sunset in Vientiane, Lao People’s Democratic Republicfor economic disaster. This has contributed to greatly elevating theissues in the minds of regional and international policymakers.Transboundary diplomacy is required and deliberation – debateand discussion aimed at producing reasonable, well-informed opinions– has been in short supply, despite decades of ‘cooperation’.Deliberation is an important process because it requires supportersof policies and projects to articulate their reasoning and identifywhich interests they serve or risks they create.Decision support tools that support deliberation are increasinglybeing used to inform Mekong water-related diplomacy. These tools,used effectively, assist the exploration of options, examination oftechnical outputs and contestation of discourses. Tools that shouldbe explicitly rooted in deliberation include multi-stakeholder platforms(MSPs), environmental flows (e-flows) and scenario-building.MSPs can help routinize deliberation, enabling complex water issuesto be more rigorously examined in better informed negotiations. Thisis not to say that MSPs are a panacea. For example, we have observedthat MSPs can be captured by players who are able to frame and controlthe debate and keep it confined within the limits of their choice. Wehave also seen MSPs permitted to engage many stakeholders in goodfaith, only to be ignored in subsequent decision-making. Despite thesecaveats, we have found that networks and organizations with flexibleand diverse links with governments, firms and civil society have beenuseful to convene and facilitate dialogues on sensitive but importanttopics for development in the Mekong region. The outcomes of theseare not primarily in terms of direct decisions on projects, policies orinstitutional reform; but rather in making sure alternatives are consideredand assessed, a diversity of views and arguments recognized, andmutual understanding improved.E-flow-setting requires the integration of a range of disciplinesfrom across the social, political and natural sciences. Above all, itrequires processes of cooperative negotiation betweenvarious stakeholders that help bridge their different andoften competing interests over water. Hence, e-flows arewell-suited to MSP approaches. There have been fewapplications of e-flows in the Mekong region, but somewith which the authors are very familiar include rapide-flows assessments of the Huong River in Viet Namand Songkhram River in Thailand, and an integratedbasin flow management project of the Lower MekongRiver. E-flow processes have substantial potential in theMekong region to assist river basin managers as theygrapple with competing demands, including the need forenvironmental sustainability. At present, however, thetool has only been used in academic or technical settingsand has not yet been internalized into influential decision-makingarenas.Deploying scenarios can enhance MSPs, e-flows andother deliberative forums. Scenarios should improveunderstanding of uncertainties, not hide them. The goal offormal scenario analysis is to generate contrasting storiesof what the future of a geographical area, policy sectoror organization might look like, depending on plausiblecombinations of known, but uncertain, social and environmentalforces. The analyst and others participating inthe process should gain insight into the contrast betweenalternative stories. Good scenarios are rigorous, self-reflexivenarratives: they attempt to be internally coherent, toincorporate uncertainties and to be explicit about assumptionsand causality.We observe that core decision-making processesabout water in the Mekong region are still often opaque[ 33 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYImage: K G HortleBangkok, Thailand, the mega-city destination for much of the proposed hydropower energy production in the Lower Mekongto all but privileged insiders. Meaningful public deliberation is stillthe exception rather than the rule. Nevertheless, more recently, wehave seen a deliberative turn and hopeful signs of water governancechange, for example:• vibrant elements in the Chinese media interested inunderstanding and reporting the water-related perspectives ofneighbouring countries• a pause and reconsideration of future development in anew era for Myanmar• an increasingly inquisitive National Assembly in Laos• bold inputs to public policy-making debates byVietnamese scientists• increased space for civil society analysts in Cambodia to engagein state irrigation policy debates• people’s environmental impact assessment in Thailand, buildingon villager-led Tai Baan participatory action research andresulting in more participatory analyses of project merits.Finally, Lower Mekong mainstream dams are now being examinedmore openly. This is a result of many factors, including anMRC-commissioned strategic environmental assessment and asubsequent formal prior-consultation process facilitated by MRC,which has yielded various technical contributions and opened anintergovernmental window for more informed discussions betweenLower Mekong countries. Each of these processes has been improvedby advocacy from civil society, science, academia and governments–including MRC, M-POWER and Save the Mekong.In the Mekong we have found that water diplomacy is improvedby bringing different perspectives into arenas and fostering deliberationto inform and shape negotiations and decisions. Specifically, wesuggest that transboundary diplomacy will be further improved when:• multi-stakeholder platforms exploring alternativefutures are used to build the trust and cooperationneeded for actors to work together to help resolvewater allocation issues• e-flow assessments are used to clarify risks andbenefits of different flow regimes on different waterusers and ecosystems• scenario building, with the participation ofmarginalized people’s representatives, is used toimprove transparency by clarifying and probingactors’ assumptions and motivations• strategic environmental assessment is used toexplore the broad impacts of existing, proposed andalternative development policies and plans early on• holistic modelling is used to quantitatively assessimpacts of scenarios and development policies andto generate base information for impact assessments• oppositional advocacy pressure is maintained toensure that political space is available for civilsociety and concerned actors to safely contest andcontribute to policies, proposals.Transboundary water diplomacy is not only the provinceof state actors. Across the Mekong region, there is muchdiplomacy underway with multiple actors manoeuvring totry and shape development directions and decisions. Thisis increasing the likelihood that decisions will be the resultof informed and negotiated processes that have assessedoptions and impacts, respected rights, accounted for risks,acknowledged responsibilities and sought to fairly distributerewards – the essence of deliberative water governance.[ 34 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYThe Nile Basin Initiative: advancing transboundarycooperation and supporting riparian communitiesAbdulkarim H. Seid, Wubalem Fekade, Emmanuel Olet, Nile Basin InitiativeTraversing a distance of 35 degrees latitude from the equatorialregion of Africa in the south to the MediterraneanSea in the north, the Nile is one of the world’s longestrivers. It is shared by 11 African countries and is a source oflivelihood for over 200 million people. The Nile drains an areaof 3.2 million square kilometres – about 10 per cent of Africa.The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) 2012 State of the Nile River Basinreport subdivides the basin into 16 eco-regions. These feature largerivers, waterfalls, lakes, wetlands, floodplains, forests, savannahs,montane ecosystems, and arid and hyper-arid lands. One of theworld’s largest freshwater wetlands, the Sudd, and the world’s secondlargest inland lake, Lake Victoria, are prominent features of the basin.The Nile Basin eco-regionsThe Nile Basin hosts some of the world’s largest congregationsof large mammals and flocks of migratory birdsfrom Eurasia and other regions of Africa.The Nile Basin is a relatively water-scarce region. Theaverage annual flow at its entrance to Egypt is about2,660 m 3 /s – about 6 per cent that of the Congo Riverat Inga. Most of the stream flow is generated from lessthan a third of the basin. The basin is prone to seasonaland inter-annual variability. Water resources developmentis needed at the upstream part (comprising sevenof the 11 riparian countries) where nearly all river flowis generated is at its infancy. The downstream part(comprising two riparian countries), is almost entirelydependent on upstream flow and has relatively betterdeveloped water infrastructure and institutions.The Nile Basin has hosted some of the oldest civilizationsof mankind. That notwithstanding, currently theNile River and its associated ecosystems – the resourcebases – are facing a number of threats. In the upperreaches the watersheds are undergoing continued andaccelerating degradation. From the Ethiopian catchmentsalone where over 86 per cent of the river flow originates,Tana-Beles integrated watershed managementproject – EthiopiaSource: NBI State of the Basin report, 2012The Eastern Nile watershed management project hasbuilt a regional knowledge base which has been used toprepare fast-track projects worth about US$80 million.One of these projects, in the upper Blue Nile inEthiopia, has scored impressive results in naturalresources management, improving the livelihoods of thelocal community, and capacity development.Examples include the preparation and implementationof 163 community watershed plans; treatment of 821ha of gully; rehabilitation of 16,000 ha of degradedhillside; development of 4,000 ha of community woodlotforestry; and 1,000 ha of small-scale irrigation in 14schemes. In addition, 85 km of community accessroads and a number of footbridges were constructed toimprove market access; and 35 farmer training centreswere established – with about 700 farmers trained onimproved cereal, fruit tree cropping, vegetable gardeningand marketing. The project also established 13 animalhealth posts; supplied 735 modern beehives and163 pieces of apiculture equipment; and established432 community water points and three village waterschemes. The project is among the NBI achievementsshowcased during the 2013 Nile Day celebrations.[ 35 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYfor example, 157-207 million tons of topsoil is washed away annually,resulting in economic loss upstream and downstream. In themidstream, important wetlands – critical in regulating the hydrologicalbalance and river flow, hosting endangered flora and fauna,and providing environmental services to local communities – areshrinking. In the most downstream reaches in the delta, salt waterintrusion into the Nile is posing growing challenges.Across the entire Nile Basin, biodiversity hotspots and unique habitatsare increasingly disappearing.Both due to sheer demographicpressure and demand driven by economic growth, the stress onthe finite and fragile water resources of the Nile is likely to grow tounmanageable proportions. The problem is compounded by the factthat each riparian country plans and implements its national waterresources development plan on the Nile in unilateral fashion. Limitedunderstanding of the science of the river; institutional insufficiency atnational and transboundary levels; and inadequate understanding ofthe impact of climate change on the Nile – all these add complexityto the management of the common resources of the Nile.The Nile Basin has been characterized by a preponderance of intraand inter-country conflicts and political instabilities. Conflicts andcivil strife related to electoral politics have been common features.The intensity and costliness of the conflicts has been aggravated bydirect or proxy support of combatants across borders.Alongside these challenges, the Nile Basin offers significant potentialfor a win-win outcome from cooperative management anddevelopment. Among others, the basin harbours noteworthy potentialFlyways of selected birds dependent on the Nile Basin for astop-over or over-winteringfor clean hydropower development and power trade; forexpanding agricultural production and increasing wateruse efficiency; for the preservation and ecotourism useof biospheres and designated hotspots of unique biologicaldiversity; for utilizing the Nile as an entry point forbroader economic-regional integration, promotion ofregional peace and security; and not least for jointlyensuring the continued existence of the Nile throughprudent and judicious utilization.The Nile Basin InitiativeGrowing recognition of the above challenges, and the realizationof the potential inter-riparian conflict that wouldensue from poorly managed, increasingly shrinking andscarce Nile water resources, spurred the member countriesto formulate a shared vision1 and establish NBI inFebruary 1999, with significant support from the internationalcommunity. NBI is headquartered in Entebbe,Uganda with two subsidiary action programme offices inAddis Ababa, Ethiopia and Kigali, Rwanda. NBI has threecore functions, namely facilitating cooperation, waterresources development and water resources management.NBI fills an important gap that has been a barrier to thejoint and sustainable management of the common NileBasin resources. It is a transitional mechanism that willphase out when the Nile River Commission is established.NBI has had several key achievements in its three corefunctions, along with various challenges and lessons intransboundary cooperation.Facilitating cooperationNBI has provided the first and only inclusive platformfor dialogue among all riparian states. Given the earlierhistory of non-cooperation characteristic of the NileBasin, creating an enabling environment was made apriority. This included building transboundary institutionsand raising awareness; building inter-riparianCommunity watershed managementproject – SudanSource: NBI State of the Basin report, 2012The Dinder and Lower Atbara watersheds are the focusareas of this fast-track watershed management project.The former, in the Blue Nile, is also home to the DinderNational Park – a designated biosphere. Pastoralistsoften encroach into the park on their way to find grazingland and watering points, which creates conflicts.This project has scored remarkable achievements ina short period. Over 27,000 ha of degraded agriculturalland has been rehabilitated; farm yield for dominantcrops has shown significant improvement, with sorghumyield increasing from a baseline 519 kg/ha to 1,249kg/ha in Dinder and from 1,249 kg/ha to 3,391kg/hain Atbara. Similarly, sesame yield has increased from202 kg/ha to 336 kg/ha in Dinder and white beanyield has increased from 887 kg/ha to 2,480 kg/ha inLower Atbara. Over 300 km of livestock routes havebeen mapped, demarcated and opened for pastoralists,which will relieve en route conflicts. Over 5,010 ha ofrangeland has been reseeded with nutritious and soilrehabilitating varieties of fodder. Fodder production hasbeen initiated in 24 villages.[ 36 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYImage: Eastern Nile Technical Regional OfficeA degraded watershed in the Blue Nile basinconfidence and mutuality; and paving the way for cooperativedevelopment such as water resources investment and planning andmanagement of the shared Nile water resources. Forums createdand facilitated by NBI have brought together decision and policymakers, technicians, engineers, academicians and other expertsfrom across the basin.As a result, nobody in the basin any longer questions whethercooperation on the Nile is necessary, desirable or doable. Rather, theconversation has shifted focus onto how to promote and expediteit. Today, in contrast to the past, Nile riparians share data, own ajointly developed state-of-the-art decision support system and worktogether in the planning of water resources development projectswith transboundary significance. This has resulted in joint identificationand preparation of over US$1 billion of investment projectsin the power, agriculture, water supply, and watershed managementand fishery sectors. Further, NBI provides the necessary enablingpolicy framework for transboundary cooperation.Fostering transboundary water resources managementShared knowledge systems are vital for transboundary cooperation.NBI has accumulated a comprehensive knowledge base on thewater and related resources of the Nile. A system of portals has beenlaunched to enhance public access to NBI knowledge resources.The first comprehensive State of the Nile River Basin report waspublished in 2012.NBI developed and operationalized a number of water resourcesplanning and management analytic tools. These include the NileEquatorial Lakes and Eastern Nile planning models, and the NileBasin Decision Support System (DSS). The Nile Basin DSS providesthe necessary modelling and decision-making tools for collaborativewater resources planning and management. The Nile BasinAgricultural Trade and Productivity Model and a number of toolkitsfor specific applications have also been developed.NBI has formulated, and is at various stages of implementing, anenvironment and social policy, environmental and social safeguardsguidelines, wetlands management strategy and climatechange strategy.Cooperative development of shared water resourcesNBI assists member states by preparing water resourcesinvestment projects, which provide benefits and distributecosts among participating countries. In pursuit ofthis, NBI facilitates agreements between countries forinvestment financing and for future management.Examples of such projects include:• the regional transmission interconnection project(where an estimated 1,000 km of transmission linesare under construction to facilitate power tradeamong Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and theDemocratic Republic of the Congo (DR Congo),and completion of the Ethiopia-Sudan transmissioninterconnection project• the 80 MW Regional Rusumo falls project ofTanzania, Burundi and Rwanda• a transboundary fisheries and watershedmanagement programme in the Lakes Edward andAlbert region (Uganda/DR Congo)• a regional irrigation and watershed managementproject in Tanzania, expected to develop around22,000 ha of irrigated agriculture• the Eastern Nile Power Trade Investment Program,which studied the hydropower development andpower trade potentials of the Blue Nile-Main Nileand prepared an investment sequencing plan• the Eastern Nile Irrigation and Drainage study.Smallholder irrigation programmes have also beenimplemented in the Mara Basin (Tanzania-Kenya).Based on a recent multi-sector investment opportunity[ 37 ]
WATER DIPLOMACYanalysis, these efforts are expected to be scaled up across the NileEquatorial Lakes region, through promotion of an additional 6,000MW of hydropower generation, linkages to the South AfricanPower Pool through interconnectors, and promotion of an estimateddevelopment of 510,000 ha of irrigated agriculture by 2035.Watershed managementNBI has been implementing a number of watershed managementprojects through its subsidiary action programmes. The projectsinvolve local communities from inception to implementation. Keyintervention areas include the improvement and diversification ofproductivity in rain-fed farming and the reversal of watershed degradation.Integrated watershed management has resulted in reducedloss of topsoil and increased crop yields at the farm level, whilebetter water quality, reduced silt load and an improved hydrologicalregime will be witnessed at micro and macro catchment levelsfurther downstream.Watershed management programmes have also been prepared inthe transboundary river basin management programmes of Mara,Kagera and Sio-Malaba-Malakisi, focusing on soil and land management,soil and water conservation, and the management of wetlandsof transboundary significance. Investment programmes have alsobeen prepared to restore the degraded Mau forest, a key catchmentfor the Mara River. Early implementation of livelihood-based watershedmanagement programmes in the Blue Nile basin in Ethiopia,Sudan and Egypt has registered impressive results.Expanding access to potable waterA number of projects contributed towards the promotion of sustainableand affordable access to safe water supply, sanitation and wastemanagement services for communities. Schemes designed andconstructed include Butihinda (Burundi), Nyagatare (Rwanda),Katuna (Uganda), Bomet and Angurai (Kenya), Mella (Uganda)and Karagwe (Burundi). The total population served by these watersupply systems is estimated at 100,000.Fostering sustainable water resources managementA number of Nile Basin environmental assets are transboundaryor have transboundary significance and require cross-border cooperationfor their management and sustainable use. NBI has beenproviding this regional forum for member states, and has taken anumber of measures to address the threats posed to these assets.The measures range from high-level policy formulation tocommunity-level awareness raising and the implementation ofcommunity-managed environmental restoration projects. The NBIEnvironment and Social Policy and Wetland Strategy have beenendorsed by the Nile Council of Ministers. These documents willguide transboundary water resource development and management,including investment planning and implementation.As part of the environmental education activities, for example, NBIpromoted a Student Awards Competition through the public mediathat contributed to raising awareness on the most critical Nile environmentalissues. Thousands of students in over 60 schools from allmember countries took part in the national and regional competition.Sustaining gains and addressing emerging challengesNBI has made considerable gains over the past decade. Themost important achievements to be singled out are the promotionof riparian cooperation and mutuality over the Nile throughbuilding confidence, scientific knowledge, tools andsustainable institutions.NBI has spearheaded the preparation of a number ofwater resources investment programmes that addressedgrowing energy and food production needs, promotedcommunity-managed programmes, raised awarenessamong riparian countries and provided the necessarypolicy framework for sustainable transboundary waterresources management.The Nile riparians have negotiated their CooperativeFramework Agreement (CFA), for which ratificationhas recently started. It is expected that the riparian stateswill form the Nile Basin River Commission and advancetheir cooperation. Three of the NBI countries have notyet signed the CFA and, as a result, there is a potentialchallenge in finding a common platform for signatory andnon-signatory states.Most of the NBI programmes to date are financedthrough grants from the international community. Withthe planned closure of the Nile Basin Trust Fund in2014, there is an urgent need for mobilizing funding tomaintain the momentum and sustain the gains made.Diverse funding mechanisms such as grants, loans,public-private partnerships and riparian contributionsneed to be explored.International practice shows that transboundary cooperationis a protracted process. In the context of the NileBasin, where the majority of upstream countries haveembarked on rapid economic growth, delays in implementingwater resources investments mean delays inmeeting the demands of growing economies and populations.This, in turn, can lead to an increasing number ofmajor water resources investment projects, such as damsand power plants, planned and implemented unilaterallyby individual riparian states. There is an urgent need toexpedite the implementation of investment programmesprepared by NBI through participation of the riparianstates, which will contribute to coordinated managementand ultimately to the sustainability of the Nile itself.Judging by experience worldwide, the all-inclusiveNile cooperation is still in its nascent stage. That isto say, the gains made so far should not be taken asirreversible. There is a need, therefore, for continuednurturing and deepening the cooperation process inorder to consolidate the achievements of the Nile’sbasin-wide cooperation.Lake Nasser-Nubia management project – EgyptThis transboundary project straddles Egypt and Sudan.The project objective is to develop a Lake Nasser-Nubiamanagement framework and to establish a sedimentand water quality monitoring system. The cumulativeimpacts of improved watershed management upstream,both in Ethiopia and Sudan, will be reflected in reducedsediment load on Lake Nasser-Nubia. The project hasbeen conducting a biannual bathymetric survey of thelake to determine sediment levels, and has establisheda data and information management system.[ 38 ]
IITransboundaryWater Management
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTCooperation over transboundary aquifers:lessons learned from 10 years of experienceKirstin I. Conti, PhD Fellow, International Groundwater Resources Assessment CentreThe International Groundwater Resource AssessmentCentre (IGRAC) is the UNESCO Global GroundwaterCentre, working under the auspices of WMO and is financiallysupported by the Government of the Netherlands. IGRACfacilitates and promotes international sharing of informationand knowledge required for sustainable development, managementand governance of groundwater resources worldwide.Since 2003, IGRAC has been providing independent content andprocess support, focusing on transboundary aquifer assessmentand groundwater monitoring.International cooperation is a cornerstone of IGRAC’s projectsand products. In collaboration with its global partners, it has 445identified transboundary aquifers worldwide. In many semi-aridThe Moraca River flowing in karst formation in the Dinaric region of South-East EuropeImage: N. Kresicand arid regions, groundwater composes the vastmajority of water use. Recently Marchard de Gramontestimated that 25 per cent of the human populationworldwide relies on groundwater to meet basic needssuch as drinking, bathing, hygiene, cooking and cleaning.In terms of commercial agriculture production,most recent estimates have shown that between 43 and65 per cent of water used for crop irrigation is groundwater.In Europe, over 80 per cent of drinking wateris supplied from groundwater. Meanwhile the WorldBank has noted that increasing access to groundwaterhas been a major catalyst of growth and developmentin Africa, Latin America and Asia.Given these circumstances, transboundary aquifersare a critically important natural resource. Thevast majority of the world’s countries share aquiferswith their neighbours. Since its inception, IGRAChas fostered cooperation among the internationalgroundwater community and the water communityat large. This began in 2003 when IGRAC conductedan inventory of existing guidelines and protocolsfor groundwater assessment and monitoring. Theinventory was aimed at improving the internationalcommunity’s access to monitoring guidelines andprotocols that might be useful to them. To confrontthese challenges, IGRAC assembled a working groupof specialists from 12 countries to develop a guidelineon groundwater monitoring for general referencepurposes. The guideline was completed in 2006 andtranslated into Spanish a year later. Following thesame objective, IGRAC developed an online databasecontaining structured information from about 400guidelines and protocols.In the last several years, assessment of transboundaryaquifers has become one of IGRAC’s mainactivities. The major transboundary aquifer assessmentactivities at IGRAC are carried out within theframework of the Internationally Shared AquiferResource Management Programme (ISARM), assessmentsoftransboundary waters for the United NationsEconomic Commission for Europe, and GlobalEnvironment Facility (GEF) projects. Internationalcooperation has been a key component of each ofthese programmes, wherein multiple countries arerequired to agree upon the parameters for identifyingand/or assessing shared groundwater resources.[ 40 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTThe role of enabling factors in transboundary aquifer interactionNeutral state In-flux state Stabile stateEnablingfactorsCooperative dialogueAdditionalinformationCollective action/AgreementNo cooperation/no conflictCatalyzingeventEnablingfactorsEnablingfactorsConflictive dialogueAdditionalinformationMaintain status quo/No agreementSource: IGRAC 2012There are two key examples of project-based cooperation for transboundaryaquifers in which IGRAC participates. IGRAC providesproject management for the Protection and Sustainable Use of theDinaric karst Transboundary Aquifer System (DIKTAS) Project,which aims to improve the understanding of transboundary groundwaterresources of the Dinaric region of South-East Europe. DIKTASis the first ever application of an integrated, transboundary managementapproach to regional Karst water resources and ecosystems.The GEF Transboundary Water Assessment Programme (TWAP)is another key mechanism through which IGRAC is enacting internationalwater cooperation. The objective of the programme is toconduct a global baseline assessment of transboundary water systems,including groundwater. In this programme, IGRAC is also developingan information system to store, manage and disseminate informationderived from the TWAP assessment. In addition to addressing thetechnical aspects of groundwater cooperation, these projects examinethe role of groundwater governance in a transboundary context.The proper governance of transboundary aquifers requiresparticularly high levels of international cooperation and coordination.Consequently, IGRAC is increasingly involved withprogrammes on groundwater governance through actions suchas contributing to the formulation of the International LawCommission’s Draft Articles on the Law of TransboundaryAquifers. IGRAC also stresses the importance of using data andinformation as the basis for groundwater management. Access tothis information is crucial to all stakeholders involved in groundwatergovernance. Therefore, IGRAC is actively contributing tothe project Groundwater Governance – a Global Framework forAction. The project is designed to raise awareness on the importanceof groundwater resources for many regions of the world, andto identify and promote best practices in groundwater governanceas a way to achieve the sustainable management ofgroundwater resources.While the body of research about groundwatergovernance is rapidly developing and internationalactors are increasingly directing resources to this issue,there are still very few effective groundwater governanceregimes at the transboundary scale. In the absenceof good groundwater governance and in the face ofthreatened transboundary aquifers, some states haveexperienced conflict and others have been motivatedto seek out cooperative mechanisms for management.Legal regimes, in particular treaties, are commonlyespoused mechanisms for cooperation. Nevertheless, inkeeping with the Year of Water Cooperation, IGRACwanted to better understand who is cooperating overtransboundary aquifers, how are they cooperating, andwhat factors lead to this cooperation. Consequently,IGRAC engaged in an in-depth study of factors thatenable cooperation over transboundary aquifers.In recent years, significant attention has been givento the potential for conflict over water resources, especiallytransboundary resources. However, researchhas shown that it is considerably more likely thatstakeholders will use cooperative approaches thanconflictual ones. In a recent study by De Stefano et al.of 2,586 recorded ‘water events’ documented between1948 and 2008, only 31 per cent were consideredconflicts. While occurrences of specific cooperativeevents are relatively well documented through mediaand publicly available information, there is a gap inunderstanding what conditions facilitate sustained[ 41 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTMap of transboundary aquifer cooperation casesNo. Aquifer [Group/System] NameAquifer States1 Abbotsford-Sumas AquiferCanada, United States2 Bolsón del Hueco-Valle de JuárezMexico, United States3 Carboniferous Aquifer Belgium, France4 Châteauguay Aquifer Canada, United States5 Aquifers of the Danube River Basin Austria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic,Germany, Hungary, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia,Slovenia, Ukraine6 Dinaric Karst Transboundary System Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Italy, Greece, Montenegro,Slovenia7 Franco-Swiss Genevois Aquifer France, Switzerland8 Guaraní Aquifer System Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay9 Aquifers of Hispaniola Island Dominican Republic, Haiti10 Kilimanjaro Aquifer Kenya, Tanzania11 Lake Chad Aquifer System Cameroon, Chad, Central African Republic, Niger, Nigeria12 Aquifers of the Mekong River Plain Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Vietnam13 Northwest Sahara Aquifer System Algeria, Libya, Tunisia14 Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System Chad, Egypt, Libya, Sudan15 Aquifers of the Orange-Senqu River Basin Botswana, Namibia, South Africa16 Poplar Aquifer Canada, United States17 Aquifers of the Sahel Region Algeria, Benin, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Mauritania18 Aquifers of the Sava River Basin Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia & Herzegovina19 Upper Rhine Aquifer France, Germany, SwitzerlandSource: IGRAC 2012cooperation over water resources. This gap is even more evidentwhen it comes to transboundary aquifers, since researchers andpractitioners have given them less attention than their surfacewater counterparts.The focus of current research on water conflict is about methodologiesand best practices for dismantling existing waterconflict. However, given that transboundary aquifers remainmostly ungoverned and conflict over groundwater has rarelyrisen to the international scale (as of yet), we at IGRAC wonderedif this is the most useful paradigm. In light of this, we questionedwhether managing potential conflict is the appropriategoal for transboundary groundwater resources. Therefore, thefocus of IGRAC’s research was on enabling cooperation sincemost aquifer states (states sharing a transboundaryaquifer) are not yet engaging about transboundaryaquifers. Given the critical importance of groundwaterresources worldwide, the report presents a globalanalysis of factors that enable and facilitate cooperationover transboundary aquifers – that is, enablingfactors for transboundary water cooperation.It is critical to provide a definition for the term‘enabling factor’ and to distinguish it from a ‘driver’of cooperation. Much attention has been devotedto assessing drivers of cooperation. However, theintent of this report was to assess how these driversmanifest as concrete actions or ‘factors’. A driver[ 42 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTA summary of enabling factors for transboundary aquifer cooperationEnabling factor(number of aquifers where present)Existing legal mechanisms (10)Existing regional institutions (16)Funding mechanisms (12)High institutional capacity (8)Previous water cooperation (15)Scientific research (7)Strong political will (8)Third-party involvement (8)DescriptionIncludes both binding and non-binding legalmechanisms, which place specific obligations onaquifer states.Involves an institution charged with promotingcooperation and coordination on issues of regionalimportance. Institution demonstrates some specificfocus on groundwater.Either the aquifer states or a third party providedthe funding for a joint project or institution.Organizations with the aquifer demonstrate theability to deal with groundwater governanceissues related to monitoring, modelling and/ormanagement.Involves past interactions regarding water resourcesbetween at least two of the aquifer states.Research is conducted specifically for the assessmentof transboundary impacts. Research providessignificant new information to the aquifer states.High-ranking government official(s) indicatedthe prioritization of groundwater managementin the aquifer.There were significant contributions to cooperationfrom entities outside of the aquifer states’governments.Patterns of influence• Highly influential in North America, Europeand Africa• Plays a key role in cases of moderate cooperation• Global geographic influence• Strong influence in medium-sized aquifers(10,000-1,000,000 km 2 ), where there aremore than two aquifer states and in cases oflow cooperation• Global geographic influence• Strong influence in large-scale aquifers(1,000,000 km 2 and more than fiveaquifer states)• Noticeable influence on high cooperation events• Strongest in Europe and North America• Not critical to promoting any specific levelof cooperation• Critical in small-sized aquifers (10,000 km 2 )• Significant influence on cases of low cooperation• Influential in North and South America; also hassome influence in Africa• Noticeable influence on low cooperation• No geographic trend• Influential in high cooperation cases• Noticeable role in the Global South• Highly influential for medium-scaletransboundary aquifers (10,000-1,000,000 km 2and 3-5 aquifer states)Source: IGRAC 2012provides impulse or motivation and causes a particular phenomenonto happen or develop. A factor is a circumstance, fact orinfluence that actively contributes to the production of a result.Therefore, in the context of cooperation, an enabling factor is acircumstance, fact or influence that actively contributes to theoccurrence of a cooperative event or cooperative interactions.Distinguishing the terms in this manner makes clear that muchattention has gone to analysing and/or hypothesising aboutvarious drivers such as power asymmetries, benefit sharing andcosts of non-cooperation. Yet very few researchers have movedtowards concretizing elements leading to cooperative action bycharacterizing them as factors, as defined here. Therefore, weasked, what are the enabling factors or the ‘ingredients’ in arecipe for cooperation?A multi-step analysis was conducted to identify the enablingfactors for transboundary aquifer cooperation. There were 19cases used to identify the enabling factors. The objective of thecase analysis was to provide as complete a picture as possibleof the circumstances that lead countries to cooperateover international aquifers. It was determinedthat a bottom-up approach was necessary given thatenabling factors are most often characterized byconcrete, on-the-ground actions. Therefore, eachcase was assembled and the conditions that spurredcooperation were assessed.Analysis of the cases shows that cooperation occursacross a wide range of hydrogeological, geographical,socioeconomic and political contexts. There areinstances of cooperation over all types of aquifersincluding unconfined, confined, confined fossil andsemi-confined, as well as two in karst formations. Theaquifers vary greatly in terms of geologic extent withthe smallest covering 19 km 2 and the largest covering2,199,000 km 2 . Hydrogeological conditions also varygreatly. In some instances, the aquifers face emergentchallenges of severe contamination or over-exploita-[ 43 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTtion; while in others, cooperation occurred prior to any negativetransboundary conditions manifesting. Cooperation occurredamong some of the world’s least developed countries and someof the world’s most developed countries. Further, the instancesof cooperation occurred under various political conditions, fromtimes of peace to times of violence.In reviewing available literature regarding transboundary watercooperation and conflict, it became clear that characterizing aparticular transboundary aquifer in a binary way – as being in astate of cooperation or conflict – would be overly simplistic. Thereality for transboundary aquifers is that governing them oftenincites both cooperation and conflict between the relevant stakeholders.Therefore, IGRAC combined several existing conceptualmodels for identifying and assessing transboundary water conflictand cooperation. In combining these models, we were able tointegrate information about specific cooperative events relevantto transboundary aquifers; a range of interactions (both cooperativeand conflictive) which occurred before and/or after theseevents; and the broader relationship dynamics among each ofthe actors in the aquifer. Using this analytical approach, eachtransboundary aquifer was then classified as being in a state oflow, moderate or high cooperation. Analysis of the cases showedthat there were eight enabling factors for transboundary aquifercooperation: existing legal mechanisms, existing regional institutions,funding mechanisms, high institutional capacity, previouswater cooperation, scientific research, strong political will andthird-party involvement.Once these eight enabling factors were identified, we describedin more detail the interplay between the enabling factors, specificcooperative events related to groundwater, analysis of interactionsbetween aquifer states, and the overall nature of transboundaryrelations. Conclusions about these interplays were discussed withrespect to low, moderate and high levels of cooperation. Thiscomparison showed that in the five cases classified as low cooperation,existing regional institutions and previous water cooperationare the enabling factors with the greatest influence. Seven caseswere identified as moderate cooperation cases. Analysis showedthat moderate cooperation required at least four enabling factors tobe present and was highly influenced by existing legal mechanisms,existing regional institutions and previous water cooperation.There were seven high cooperation cases in which there was noobserved correlation between the number of enabling factors anda high level of cooperation. However, high cooperation cases wereprimarily enabled by existing regional institutions, funding mechanismsand strong political will. We also observed the critical roleof existing regional institutions in all three types of cases.Based on this analysis there are several noteworthy conclusions.Overall, the research indicated that the enabling factors presentin cooperative cases do have some relationship with the level ofcooperation. Low cooperation is often motivated by scientificresearch, especially when a (potential) problem with the aquiferis identified and the states decide to begin interacting about it.Moderate cooperation is mainly birthed and/or supported by existingregional institutions. This implies that having a functionalforum for cooperation in conjunction with the desire to cooperatecan result in concrete cooperative actions for transboundaryaquifer governance. However, it seems that achieving high cooperationis relatively complex. There did not appear to be any oneinfluence that was critical. Rather, scenarios of high cooperationwere highly contextual and other critical dynamicswere at play. Unfortunately these dynamics couldnot be adequately captured within the constraints ofthis study. Therefore, it is recommended that futureresearch should further develop and refine the enablingfactors; more closely examine the circumstances underwhich high levels of cooperation are born; and movetowards generating actionable recommendations forparties seeking to intensify cooperation on transboundaryaquifers.As such, we recommend that the following actionsare considered for enhancing transboundary aquifercooperation. Aquifer states should enhance andstrengthen existing legal mechanisms, prior to or atthe same time as creating new mechanisms for transboundaryaquifer management. Existing regionalinstitutions, in which a high level of cooperationalready exists, should be leveraged and motivatedto address issues of groundwater management.Financing mechanisms should be integrated intocooperative efforts in order to fund activities inlarge-scale transboundary aquifers. Organizationsshould strengthen their institutional capacity forgroundwater management through education andpartnerships. Recognizing and capitalizing onprevious water cooperation in organizations suchas existing river basin organizations and internationaltask forces for groundwater management canalso catalyse transboundary aquifer cooperation.Additionally, extending scientific and technicalefforts to groundwater resources research will serveas a basis for transboundary dialogue and management.Those seeking to elevate cooperation to a highlevel should foster strong political will by enhancingeducation and communication mechanismsfor politicians and government officials regardinggroundwater resources. Finally, third-party organizationsthat have the appropriate mandate, capacity andfinancing to facilitate cooperation over transboundaryresource management should dedicate some oftheir efforts towards taking action for transboundaryaquifer management.This research was hopefully the beginning of greaterresearch efforts on transboundary aquifer cooperation.The primary purpose of this research was exploratory.As a result, the outcomes are mainly descriptive.Hypotheses about causal links between any of theenabling factors and cooperation were avoided.Nevertheless, IGRAC’s mission and projects willcontribute directly to enhanced transboundary aquifercooperation through offering tools which strengtheninstitutional capacity for groundwater. Further, ouronline data portal, the Global Groundwater MonitoringNetwork and Global Groundwater Information Systemaim to increase knowledge of transboundary aquifersthrough the dissemination of scientific and technicalinformation. We also look forward to continuingcooperation with international partners dedicated tothe management of the world’s groundwater.[ 44 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTSustaining transboundary water managementby investing in community cooperationBenjamin Noury, Associate Director, Oxyo WaterTransboundary cooperation is often associated with interstatemechanisms and high political levels. However,among the 276 transboundary river basins presentlyidentified, numerous examples of cooperation involve acombination of international, regional, national and localstakeholders in a complex interplay. This article analysestwo case studies on multi-scale interactions and shows howprojects can generate benefits at the transboundary level whileacting at the community scale.Communities living in transboundary river basins share a commonenvironment. Yet, they are often separated by borders, which areusually indicated by the river itself. People live in similar conditionsand generally depend on the same water resources. However, theyrarely have opportunities to meet with each other and exchange oncommon issues. This lack of communication can generate mistrustbetween these populations and facilitate the emergence of preconceivedideas. In the case of the Okavango, some communities inBotswana believed that the decrease of the river flow every yearwas due to an excessive use of the riparian communities locatedLocal children are involved in the GWN project to promote sustainable water managementImage: B Nouryupstream. During project implementation in this basin,they realized that the recurring drought they werefacing had been the result of a natural phenomenonlinked to the rainfall system.In order to create the right transboundary watermanagement conditions, it is important not to neglectthese communities and to invest time and money toencourage innovative local approaches. These initiativesand approaches contribute to establishing a climate ofconfidence that encourages transboundary cooperation.Local communities are stakeholders that can be reliedupon and who are more quickly dedicated to initiativesrelating to the long-term development of their territoryand environment. In addition to exchanging dataor signing treaties, community-level transboundaryactivities contribute directly to sustain and strengthencooperation within a river basin.Two projects carried out by non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs) promote this approach of localcooperation for transboundary benefits: the GoodWater Neighbors (GWN) in the Jordan river basin andthe Every River Has Its People Project (ERP) in theOkavango river basin.The GWN project was established by Friends of theEarth in the Middle East (FoEME) in 2001 within theJordan river basin with two primary goals. The first wasto advance cross-border cooperation by focusing attentionon shared water concerns and the need to protectshared water resources. The second was to foster peaceand cooperation through long-term trust building basedon the shared interests of neighbouring communities.To achieve these goals, the GWN project selectedneighbouring communities on opposite sides of thenational border or political divide, and located in closeproximity to a shared water resource. In each community,FoEME hired a local staff person from within thecommunity to lead activities on common water issues.Initially, eleven Israeli, Palestinian and Jordaniancommunities, divided into groups of neighbours, wereselected to participate in the project. Many of thesecommunities were able to see each other directly overthe border. People living in these bordering communitiesobtained their water from the same sources, oftenjointly polluting those water sources as well. By 2013,the GWN project had successfully been expanded to28 communities.[ 45 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: B NouryImage: B NouryTourism is boosting local businessCross-border cooperation is helping to rehabilitate the Jordan RiverDesigned as a holistic model for community partnership, the projectinvolved youth groups, adult residents and local government representatives.Within each sector, emphasis was placed on interactionwith the neighbouring community. The project undertook joint youthgroup activities, adult forum visits to their neighbouring communityand mayors’ bilateral and regional gatherings. At the regional level,GWN worked to encourage sustainable water management throughinformation sharing, dialogue and cooperative ventures. The GWNproject fostered personal interactions that naturally developed intorelationship building over time. No less important, due to the factthat water issues are linked to community development options andthat water issues are shared, the project helped foster the understandingthat addressing and solving many of the local problems requirescross-border cooperation. The GWN project went on to demonstratethe ability of local community partnerships to resolve environmentalhazards through mutually beneficial cross-border cooperation.The first step of the project focused on raising awareness andcollecting information. It has been an important challenge to explainthe purpose of the project to the population and collect informationon their needs. To both gain the trust of the community andto empower the youth, concrete projects were undertaken in eachcommunity, led by young people. The GWN team created a groupof youth volunteer water trustees in each community. School buildingswere transformed into water-wise buildings, reusing greywateror rainwater for the flushing of toilets and ecological gardens werebuilt. Empowerment of the young generation facilitated the creationof a cooperative knowledge and dialogue with the adults of therespective communities. The young people showed, through theiractions, the opportunities and benefits to work with the neighbouringvillages to their elders.Adult forums have indeed been created afterwards,offering a platform for discussion with local professionalsand planners on environmental problems andpossible solutions. The Jordan River communitiesbecame very much involved in the process of establishingconcrete activities, which not only improvedand deepened the relationships across the border, butalso brought eco-tourism and, therefore, economicdevelopment to the region. Steps have been taken tocreate a Peace Park at the junction of the Jordan andthe Yarmouk Rivers, and Neighbours‘ Paths were developedin several communities. Following the path ofwater, ending at the border, the trails highlighted theconnection between the communities and their waterresources, and aimed to attract local, national andforeign tourists. This idea mobilized the local communityin support of cross-border cooperation, protectinglocal ecosystems and promoting local entrepreneurship.Finally, the third group of stakeholders involvedwere the mayors. They signed Memoranda ofUnderstanding to reinforce the vision of a sharedfuture and raise political attention. Several partneringmunicipalities are cooperating on the issue of wastewaterreuse and management. A more recent element ofthe project launched by FoEME was a TransboundaryAdvocacy of Parliamentarians. This project aimed toraise awareness among elected representatives anddecision makers in Palestine, Jordan and Israel on theneed to find sustainable solutions to the threats facingthe region’s shared waters.[ 46 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: B NouryCanoe trails along the Okavango River have been set up to generate local incomeAs a key lesson, this GWN project outlines that raising awarenessof the interdependence of environmental issues and the fact thatsolutions to environmental problems often concern neighbouringcommunities, will increase people’s willingness to cooperate.In the Okavango River Basin, the ERP portrays a different modelof transboundary cooperation while highlighting the importance ofthe involvement of local communities.It is a regional project jointly coordinated by the KalahariConservation Society in Botswana, the Namibian Nature Foundationin Namibia and the Association for Environment Conservation andIntegrated Rural Development in Angola. The project had twomain phases and ran from 2000 to 2007. Its overall objective wasto promote sustainable management of natural resources in theOkavango Basin and facilitate river basin stakeholders in decisionmakingprocesses concerning the basin.The first phase focused on exchanging information, establishinglinks with relevant bodies, and promoting understanding betweenOkavango riparian communities and project staff. Through socioecologicalsurveys, the project was introduced to communitiesand information about community-resource relationships wasgathered. These interviews and focus groups carried out in thewhole basin have been key in identifying the issues faced by thecommunities, determining the causes of these issues and suggestingpossible solutions.Based on this first assessment, the second phase of the projectpromoted the establishment of appropriate institutional mechanismsand capacity building for sustainable natural resourcemanagement in specific local communities. At the basin level, aBasin Wide Forum (BWF) was established. This is a consultativeforum of stakeholders coming from the communities livingalong the Okavango River. In each riparian state,ten members are elected represented by one nationalrepresentative. The BWF regional chairman participatesin the Okavango River Basin Water Commission(OKACOM) meetings with the commissioners. TheBWF ensures dual flow of information by keeping bothbasin communities, including traditional leaders, aswell as basin authorities, such as OKACOM, informedof each other’s opinions and initiatives. It ensures acommon vision and understanding of the problemsand challenges in the natural resources managementof the Okavango River Basin.At the local level, the ERP launched naturalresources management activities and developmentprojects within communities (campsites, trophyhunting, bird guiding, mokoro [canoe] trails, traditionaldances and so forth). Many of those activitieswere not directly linked to the water resources, butthey generated income for the communities whosubsequently took more interest in maintaining andmanaging their environment. For example, trophyhunting can earn up to USD20,000 for the communityby allowing elephant hunting on its natural reserve.In order to respect hunting quotas, an agreementwith the Ministry of Environment and Tourism wassigned for each hunter by the Traditional Authority.The incomes generated by these activities are sharedbetween all the members of the community.These combined activities assist the ERP to achieveits development targets which fall broadly under the[ 47 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: B NouryImage: B NouryEcological gardens have been built in local schools in the Jordan River BasinWater pump in Seronga, Botswanafollowing categories: economic well-being; social and human development;education and training; and sustainable ecosystem and naturalresources management.These two initiatives demonstrate two different approaches tomobilizing local populations for transboundary water management.On one side, the GWN has favoured the twinning of communities,while on the other side the ERP has facilitated the emergence of abasin-wide network. These approaches have been designed firstly tomatch the characteristics and profiles of the territories where theyhave been implemented. In the political context of the Jordan basin,it is a challenge to organise regional meetings on a regular basis. Thelogistical and political constraints between Jordan, Israel and thePalestinian territories are the major obstacle to implementing sucha mechanism in this basin.NGOs played a key role in the achievement of these successfulenterprises. They initiated the projects, supported and followed thecommunities by teaching them and showing them how to improvetheir environment, and facilitated the relations among and betweenthe parties: communities, political authorities and internationaldonors who funded these projects.In both cases, the success of these initiatives has been builtaround three steps: identification of the population needs, capacitybuilding and financial independence. Apart from the dedicatedtrainings and workshops, the participation of the communitiesin these projects was a capacity building programme by itself.Through the different activities implemented, the communitiescould develop their technical, administrative and negotiationknowledge and abilities. This allows them to play a more effectiverole in transboundary water interactions.In both cases again, the NGOs looked for executing income-generatingactivities to decrease communities’ dependence on externalfunding. Neighbours‘ Paths, trophy hunting or handicrafts have beendeveloped to provide a supplementary source of incometo communities and to alleviate poverty in poor areas.These community transboundary projects haveenabled communities to:• Build a peaceful environment to managetransboundary water resources• Improve water management at the local level with adirect benefit for its inhabitants• Reduce poverty with participative practices and thecreation of new income generating activities• Strengthen relational and social learning amongcommunities from the different sides of the border• Develop communities’ knowledge and reflection ontheir practices, their respective issues, their causesand their consequences.Transboundary cooperation is not only a venue forhigh-level political players; local communities have arole to play as well. The participation processes appliedin the Jordan and Okavango basins facilitated watercooperation, sustainability and poverty reduction. Acommunity identity has arisen, not associated to acountry, but to a river basin. An international NGO,the International Secretariat for Water, is promotingthis ideal and has created a Blue Passport to reinforcecitizenship awareness throughout river basins worldwide.All basiners can obtain their Blue Passport toaffirm that they belong to a hydrographical ecosystemand to demonstrate their commitments for waterin their river basin. In addition to being citizens ofNamibia, Botswana or Angola, people can now claimtheir citizenship of the Okavango River Basin.[ 48 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTTransboundary water management – why itis important and why it needs to be developedAnders Jägerskog, Stockholm International Water Institute andUnited Nations Development Programme Shared Waters PartnershipIn many aspects water is among the most ‘shared’ resourceson Earth. Close to 50 per cent of the Earth’s land surfacearea is comprised of shared river and lake basins. Some276 river basins cross the political boundaries of two or morecountries, and about 40 per cent of the world’s populationlives in river and lake basins that cross international borders. 1Globally, about 2 billion people depend on groundwater, whichincludes well over 300 transboundary aquifer systems. Thesefacts represent the basic premise of the transboundary watermanagement challenge facing the international community.Therefore, developing approaches that balance interdependenciesof transboundary waters is a matter of high importance. The2006 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) HumanDevelopment Report 2 acknowledges that “managing that interdependenceis one of the great human development challengesfacing the international community.” Even so, abouttwo thirds of the transboundary rivers do not haveany cooperative management framework. It is clearthat much remains to be done.States that share transboundary waters are facingincreasing demands for water, hydrologic variability,unilateral basin development and other conflicts thatcould contribute to tensions over transboundary water.Adding to these challenges, institutions for promotingjoint management of shared water resources andmanaging differences are often missing. Where they doexist, they often remain ad-hoc, disparate and underfinanced.Among other challenges are a lack of commonglobal platforms to advance joint management ofImage: Michael Moore, 2006A bridge in Croatia. Managing interdependencies of transboundary waters is one of the great human development challenges facing the international community[ 49 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImproving transboundary water cooperationAdvances in transboundary water management areurgently needed and there is a range of ways to overcomethe challenges. A key insight is to understand thevarious actors at play in the transboundary arena. Earleand others provided an understanding of how variousstakeholders act (and interact) in a complex system inthe development of transboundary water management. 9An improved understanding of this context is crucial forthose wanting to better understand and efficiently engagein transboundary water management. Notwithstandingcontemporary challenges, there are also new challengesemerging that need to be addressed – preferably in a cooperativemanner. While national institutions and legislativebodies provide mechanisms for addressing conflictingdemands within a country, there are no equivalent institutionalmechanisms to respond to transboundary problems.Without such mechanisms, competition for water mightlead to disruptive conflicts.Zeitoun and Mirumachi argue that it is imperative tomake a thorough analysis of the power structures prior toany engagement in the support of transboundary watersmanagement. 10 While maintaining that power should beat the centre of analysis they do not support the notionthat a region cannot move towards wider cooperationand integration without taking it into account. However,without recognizing the power structure dynamic,resulting policy measures may be misguided and unintransboundarywaters and a lack of coordinated approaches amongdevelopment partners. In response to these challenges the UnitedNations General Assembly, through resolution 65/154, declared2013 as the International Year of Water Cooperation. It urged statesand other relevant actors to take this opportunity to promote actionsat all levels, including appropriate international cooperation aimedat the achievement of internationally agreed water-related goals.The challenges to effective transboundary water managementappear different in diverse parts of the world. In regions that are‘securitised’ (where there is a strong focus on security issues such asmilitary conflicts, for example the Middle East region), cooperationand advancement of cooperation beyond the water sector is arguablyless likely than in regions where there are less pressing securityissues. 3 In other parts of the world, financing for appropriate institutionaldevelopment for joint management is lacking, and in yet othercontexts, underfinancing of much-needed infrastructural developmentto meet increased climate variability and change prevails. 4There follows an outline of the importance of adequate managementof transboundary waters and suggestions for ways in whichit can be improved and developed, as well as the identification ofa number of new challenges for the effective management of transboundarywaters. A case study featuring the Middle East illustratesthe importance of adequate management of transboundary watersby highlighting examples of success and failure between ripariancountries within the Jordan Basin.Around 40 per cent of the world’s population lives in river and lakebasins that cross international bordersImage: Manfred Matz, 2005The importance of adequate managementThe potential costs of tensions between riparian nations over transboundarywaters are high. They can limit prospects for regionalintegration, trade and stability. This in effect limits the potentialfor sustainable development to materialise. On the other hand, iftransboundary waters are appropriately managed they can serve asa focal point for cooperation, thereby diminishing tensions betweencountries while promoting regional integration and development,both within a basin and in a wider region.In contrast, human security and development can be made vulnerableby ignoring transboundary waters, since conflict or impropermanagement may lead to a lack of regional preparedness or capacity toaddress challenges such as floods and droughts. These vulnerabilitiesare further exposed by the absence of adequate systems or mechanismsto effectively share hydrological data and information within abasin. In certain cases, information may be available in the upstreampart of a river system, but without joint management and opencommunication, downstream neighbours may not receive adequateinformation needed to develop an appropriate response. In the caseof a flood, this lack of openly shared intelligence can have potentiallydevastating effects. Consequently, the effects of improperly managedtransboundary waters bleed into other sectors. For example, efforts toeradicate poverty can be severely hampered as they are related, at leastindirectly, to the ways in which transboundary waters are managed. 5The quality of transboundary cooperation is another area thatmust be addressed. 6 Although the coordination of shared resourcesbetween countries is fundamental from the perspectives of justice,equity and sustainability, it merely forms the foundation fromwhich higher levels of cooperation are built. Furthermore, Granitand Claasen have identified different power levels as a challengeand a barrier to development towards sustainable transboundarywater management. 7 Power asymmetry between parties is often animpediment to effective cooperation. 8 Moving beyond the basiccoordination of shared resources and closely examiningthese dynamics is essential to the enhancement of transboundarycooperation from a qualitative standpoint.[ 50 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTtentionally result in favour of the stronger party – thus entrenching astatus quo that in the long run may be disruptive for effective, just andsustainable cooperation. The authors maintain that it is important tostrengthen the weaker parties in a region so that all actors can interacton equal terms with each other when negotiating the management ofa shared resource such as water. In this way, creating an equilibriumbetween all riparians within a basin means to establish the enablingenvironment necessary to achieve higher levels of cooperation andcoordination – an assertion shared by Zeitoun and Jägerskog. 11Notwithstanding the challenges posed by an uneven distributionof power within a basin, there are new challenges on the horizon.The impacts of climate change are profoundly evident throughouthydrological systems. From the transboundary perspective,increased climatic variability is greatly concerning. In certainregions climatic variability will result in an excess of water duringcertain parts of the year contrasted by a deficit during others.Unfortunately, few transboundary agreements (where they evenexist) have been designed to compensate for increased variabilityas they are often restricted by a rigid definition of water allocationexpressed by volumes of water and not according to percentagesof flow which would allow for greater flexibility. Thus increasedclimatic variability will result in an increased pressure on, in manyinstances, rather weak agreements. 12 Another important challengerelates to the increasing investments in land by foreign capitaliststhat are being made primarily in Africa, but also in Latin Americaand parts of Asia. 13 Often the agreements guiding these investmentsare ‘water blind’. They do not always include provisionsfor water and, where they do, it is not made clear whether thatwater is derived from national or transboundary sources. It canbe presumed that in cases where the investments will draw ontransboundary waters this will adversely affect the hydro-politicalrelations in the basin. 14 Part of this equation also relates to the‘water, food, energy’ nexus where ‘virtual’ trade-offs(for example, as manifested through trade in virtualwater 15 ) between water for food production as well asenergy production are outlined. 16 This also has implicationsfor transboundary relations – in particularwhere there is a lack of water resources and the tradeoffsare ‘real’.At present, the promotion of transboundary watercooperation is underfinanced within the internationalsystem, and mechanisms to fill the financialgap are scarce. Development partners are generallynot programmed to finance processes withouta clear result and timeline. Generating cooperationin transboundary basins largely consists of promotinga process of building collaborative structures andinstitutions, commonly at both national and regionallevels. This process is inevitably time-consuming andoften means taking two steps forward and one stepback. For a development partner to engage in buildingsuch cooperative structures in a shared river basin,patience and the understanding that this process mostoften transcends the lifetime of a single project areprerequisites. Process financing is often what is neededto secure, deepen and improve water-related collaborationin transboundary basins where the parties havelittle or no history of such collaborative efforts acrossother sectors of mutual interest. 17Transboundary waters in the Middle EastThe Middle East represents a region rife with politicaland ideological conflict throughout history. Tothis day, many conflicts remain unresolved and thereStakeholder action and interaction in the development of transboundary water managementResearch, AcademicDonors & IFIs – developingnew concepts often basedon the solutions developedby the WR communityWater Resource Community –managers and users of water;developing pragmatic solutionson the groundPoliticians – allocating valuesin society, protecting stateinterest, sovereignty, rights etc.Co-opt and support ideas from theResearchers: on their termsSource: Earle et al, 2010[ 51 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTstill exist deep cleavages between neighbouring nations. However,there are some encouraging signs of cooperation over sharedwaters. There are, in fact, situations where water seems to bethe singular bond between countries that have been historicallyprone to conflict. For example, the Jordan Basin features a peaceagreement between Israel and Jordan that regulates water allocationsstemming from the Jordan River to quite a large extent andeven includes a provision for storing of Jordanian ‘winter water’in Lake Tiberias in Israel for later release during the dry summermonths when the water is needed. Since the signing of the agreementin 1994, there has been a functional relationship – albeitnot always smooth – made possible by the parties’ arrangement toshare water. Alternatively, the distinct power asymmetry betweenIsrael and Palestine has prevented a similar arrangement betweenthose two countries. Since Palestine does not have the same politicalclout regionally or internationally as Jordan, it is all too easyfor Israel to dominate the water situation. Consequently, there isno fully-fledged agreement between them addressing water issues,either quantitatively or qualitatively, in great detail. Although itis noted in current agreements that the Palestinians have ‘waterrights’– those rights are not clearly defined. 18ConclusionsIt has been suggested that regional cooperation over water as ashared resource can be a recipe for wider cooperation. While thismay be the case, it is clear that such an assertion shouldnot be overextended. 19 Phillips and others point outthat the level of securitisation in a river basin is animpediment to a functionalist (cooperation leading tocooperation) approach since the preoccupation of thestates will be on national security, thereby clearly limitingthe room for regional perspectives. 20 This is clearlyevident in places like the Jordan Basin, 21 but also inother regions with a strong security focus. This does notmean that cooperation cannot happen, but the assertionthat this would almost automatically lead to widercooperation is far-fetched.The challenges faced by the international communityare daunting. However, development partnerscan contribute to overcoming these challenges bysupporting the processes of cooperation that underpinsystems of best or ideal practice in transboundary watermanagement. Staying for the long haul is essential tothe achievement of sustainable and effective cooperativeoutcomes. Öjendal and others 22 conclude that, giventhe challenges at hand – compounded by the uncertaintiessurrounding climate change and increasedpopulation growth – it is more relevant than ever todiscuss transboundary water relations as a matter ofcontinuous negotiation.Image: Rami Abdelrahman, SIWI 2013The Jordan River along the Jordan-Israel northern border: there are some encouraging signs of cooperation over shared waters in the Middle East[ 52 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTCooperation on small riverscan make a differenceJeff Smith for the International Water Management InstituteAlong two glacier-fed tributaries leading to the decimatedAral Sea in central Asia, river flow, water distributionand other data are shared across national borders. Aspart of the cooperative effort, a river management official inKyrgyzstan used a radio phone provided by the project to warnhis downstream counterparts in Tajikstan of heavy rains andhelp avert a potential devastating flash flood and mudslide.Sometimes water specialists cross borders or meet in neutralzones to discuss water management issues. When borders aretight, they keep in touch by telephone or Skype.The Colombo, Sri Lanka-based International Water ManagementInstitute (IWMI) 1 has worked to foster transboundary cooperationon these two small rivers – the Khojabakirgansai shared byKyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, and the Shakhimardansai shared byKyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. 2 “If your neighbour is in peace thenyou are in peace,” A’zamjon Rahmatullaev, the head of an Uzbekbasin irrigation authority in the area, said at a workshop last year incharacterizing the importance of cooperation.IWMI, one of 15 Consultative Group on InternationalAgricultural Research (CGIAR) research centres 3 supported bya consortium of governments, private foundationsand other organizations, generally takes a basin-wideapproach. But in this case, the organization believesthat potential conflicts in this volatile region can beeased through cooperation on small rivers, with thehope that cooperation can spread to broader areas.Local communities in essence learn to manage thewater supply and infrastructure themselves, and maintainit over the long term.Joint river management planning has resulted inbetter communication, more reliable and timely waterdistribution, improved maintenance and a processfor resolving disputes. IWMI helped the groupssystematize what previously was an ad hoc process.“Everything is transparent,” says Mark Giordano,IWMI theme leader, water and society. “The system isworking better overall.”IWMI researcher Kai Wegerich says it is difficult todraw a direct link between cooperation and livelihoods.While water efficiency may be improving, IWMI’sresearch has shown that livelihoods in the basin areImage: Ikuru Kawajima/IWMIGood data underpins successful water cooperation. Students in water management at the Kyrgyz National Agrarian University are the first generation to learnmodern techniques of water data collection[ 53 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTThe world’s top 50 water consuming nations per capita (top) and per produced GDP (bottom)6000Water use/capita [m 3 / year]400020000TurkmenistanGuyanaIraqUzbekistanKyrgyz RepublicTajikistanUnited StatesAzerbaijanCanadaEstoniaKazakhstanSurinameIran, Islamic Rep.SudanUruguayNew ZealandPakistanEcuadorTimor-LesteAustraliaSwazilandViet NamArmeniaPhilippinesSaudi ArabiaEgypt, Arab Rep.UkraineGreeceThailandSyrian Arab RepublicBulgariaArgentinaPortugalItalyLithuaniaMadagascarJapanSpainMexicoMyanmarLao PDRLibyaCubaPeruChileNetherlandsSri LankaIndiaNorwayAfghanistanWater use/GDP [m 3 / USD]2.521.510.50Kyrgyz RepublicTajikistanMadagascarUzbekistanTimor-LesteAfghanistanTurkmenistanPakistanIraqViet NamGuyanaMaliNepalLao PDRSudanZimbabweIndiaMauritaniaNigerPhilippinesBangladeshGuineaMoldovaEgypt, Arab Rep.ArmeniaSyrian Arab RepublicUkraineSwazilandEritreaEcuadorSri LankaSierraLeoneAzerbaijanTanzaniaBhutanGuinea-BissauEthiopiaCambodiaHaitiThailandMalawiSenegalIndonesiaGeorgiaAlbaniaSurinameNicaraguaKazakhstanBurundiMoroccoSource: IWMI. Data: World Bank (2013)being strained by climate change, increasing population, expandingfarms and deteriorating water canal infrastructure.IWMI has been involved in the tributary work since 2007 anda broader water resource management and agricultural productivityprogramme in the Ferghana Valley since 2001. The SwissAgency for Development and Cooperation is a key donor. IWMI’sregional partner is the Scientific Information Center of Inter-StateCommission for Water Coordination. 4An explosive mix of ethnicities coexists in the basin, predominantlyKyrgyz, Tajiks and Uzbeks, who rely heavily on agricultureand livestock. The mountains and plains are dry. The river-fedvalley, often referred to as central Asia’s breadbasket, consumes ahuge amount of water per capita because of inefficiencies and toirrigate cotton and commodity crops such as wheat. Livelihoodsare therefore vulnerable to water variability. Poverty is high, as islabour migration, especially to Russia, in part because of the lack ofeconomic opportunities and services. Water resource managementon a regional scale remains unresolved. The region has been a politicalhotspot, marked by violent inter-ethnic clashes.However, evidence is growing worldwide that shared waterresources can be the catalyst for cooperation, rather than conflict.In a review of more than 500 international freshwater agree-ments covering 276 international basins, Oregon StateUniversity’s Aaron Wolf and IWMI found that watercooperation trumps conflict, especially in cases whereinstitutions have played a strong role. 5 “There’s been aconcern about water wars, but the reality on the groundis that countries have come up with many, many waysto cooperate over water,” says Giordano. “The manyways are not necessarily the theoretically correct ones.”Wolf described the IWMI project as a great opportunityto show how cooperation at a local level canspread upwards: “Given the complexities at the intersectionof hydrology and politics at even the smallestscale in this tense setting, IWMI’s work may well helptowards easing tensions around one of the most difficulthydropolitical problems in the world.”The Aral Sea regionWater management research in the region has gatheredsteam since the collapse of the Soviet Union in1991, with efforts focused on the threatened Aral Seaand two main rivers leading to it – the Syr Darya andthe Amu Darya.[ 54 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: Ikuru Kawajima/IWMILivelihoods in the region are vulnerable to water variabilityThe Aral Sea has been considered one of the world’s biggestenvironmental disasters. The lake, one of the largest in the worldin the 1960s, was nearly sapped dry by a Soviet plan to divert waterto irrigate vast cotton fields. The shrinking of the Aral Sea virtuallydestroyed the region’s fishing industry, an important ecosystem,left a legacy of pollution with health implications, and is believedto have led to more extreme weather.The 2,200 km Syr Darya is the longest river in Central Asia.It starts with the confluence of two tributaries in the Tien Shanmountains in Kyrgyzstan and flows downstream into the FerghanaValley in Uzbekistan. Within the Ferghana Valley, 33 tributariescontribute to the river flow that enters Tajikistan and fills theKairakkum Reservoir. Tajikistan lifts water from the reservoir toirrigate area farms. From the reservoir, the Syr Darya flows backinto Uzbekistan and across southern Kazakhstan before terminatingin the Aral Sea.Under the Soviet regime, crops were mainly grown in the downstreamplains, with livestock primarily raised in the upstreammountains. Although an extensive amount of water managementinfrastructure existed downstream, there was mainly large-scaleinfrastructure upstream on the main tributaries and very little onthe small transboundary tributaries. For example, only about halfa dozen tributaries have seasonal upstream dams, andthey are poorly maintained.In the Syr Darya basin, nearly 80 per cent of the waterwas lost due to infrastructure problems compared withan average of 60 per cent in developing countries,according to IWMI research published in 2004.Water user associations (WUAs)consisting primarilyof farmers were established in the Kyrgyz part ofthe two basins in the late 1990s as part of a WorldBank-financed project. Within the two basins IWMIstarted to promote the associations on the Tajik aswell as Uzbek side in 2007, as well as strengtheningthe existing WUAs in Kyrgyzstan. The goal was forassociation members to make key decisions on operations,development plans and strategy.IWMI started work on the two tributaries as pilotprojects in 2007, organizing workshops to extendcooperation across borders and discuss technicalmatters of mutual interest. Critical times were identified,such as the water-scarce months of the earlyspring and autumn, and the heavy rain months whichmight cause mud-flows.[ 55 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTCooperation at local levelThere was reason to focus cooperation efforts on the small tributariesflowing into the Syr Darya. Water sharing in these ‘subcatchments’is a local, bilateral issue with infrastructure shared by borderingcountries. The setting can also be ideal to demonstrate what strategiesmight work on other tributaries.Research also showed that cooperation on water managementcould exist at the local level even amid tension at the nationallevel. For example, Uzbekistan and Tajikstan were in disagreementregarding the construction of a large hydroelectric dam,while Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan grappled over water andnatural gas trades.The Soviet break-up has both simplified and complicatedmatters, with former Soviet colleagues now working on oppositesides of the border. Abdukhakim Abdusaminov, chairman of aTajik water users’ group on Khojabakirgansai and former head ofJabbor Rasulov district, recalled at one workshop that before theSoviet split-up, it was quite easy to coordinate and monitor waterallocations, agree on maintenance projects, and discuss emergingissues. The IWMI project, in essence, has solidified those informalrelationships through regular meetings.Jusipbek Kazbekov, an IWMI researcher in central Asia, recallssome key river management operators hurriedly leaving theworkshop room one day as clouds looked ominous so they couldcoordinate safeguards to the systems. A warning of possible flashfloods, for example, can spark downstream operators to close waterintake structures and open flood management dams, canals andchannels to avoid costly damages.To aid in transboundary cooperation, IWMI, with partners, has alsocollected Soviet and post-independence water agreements and protocols,with particular focus on the 33 small transboundary tributarieswithin the Ferghana Valley.The documents cover a wide range oftopics including water sharing, infrastructure maintenance, borderdemarcations, transboundary infrastructure property rights, landexchanges, pasture use and water withdrawals. Plans are to create awebsite that provides the ability to search and download documentsand data, as well as maps. The documents provide information onlong-term patterns in the region, and lessons for the future.At a workshop last year in Ferghana, Uzbekistan, IWMI staff talkedabout the different ways the parties could institutionalize joint watergovernance for the Shakhimardansai tributary. Attendees participatedin a group exercise to discuss the options. The participantsagreed that a more systematic approach was needed, and establisheda river-wide water commission consisting of board members fromsub-basin water committees on both sides of the river with appropriatesupport from the respective governments.Later that month, IWMI held a similar workshop in Bishkek,Krygyzstan for the Khojabakirgansai tributary, the vast majorityof which lies in upstream Kyrgyzstan. After flowing into Tajikstan,the river flows into the Plotina Dam, which is used from Marchthrough October to divert water into a canal to irrigate fields.An agreement signed in 1962 calls for 79 per cent ofKhojabakirgansai’s annual flow to be distributed in the arid Tajikbasin. Kyrgystan has had plans since the 1970s to build a damto double its irrigated land upstream. The plan has yet to receivefunding but is a subject for discussion with the Tajiks as part ofcooperative effort. While there remains tension over water allocation,there now is a joint plan to discuss river management issuesand cooperation during the critical periods.Kazbekov says the tributary cooperation hasresulted in better communication between farmersand authorities. Until recently, water was heavilysubsidized or free in central Asia. Now water usershave to pay in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, makingthem more motivated to ensure the system is in goodworking order.However, Wegerich and other researchers urgecentral Asia also to look beyond agriculture.6 Theregion is often viewed as water scarce, but in reality,the freshwater carried by the Syr Darya and Amu Daryaexceed commonly used water shortage standards,according to researchers. The problem, they say, is thatwater is being used primarily to cultivate crops such aswater-gobbling cotton.Economies are beginning to become less dependenton agriculture, but the transition away from naturalresources to service-based and knowledge-basedindustries such as information technology needs toaccelerate. IWMI researchers argue that such a strategyis needed not only for the sake of future waterresources amid climate change; it would also makethe region more politically secure by offering morepromising social and economic opportunities.The framework for water cooperation also can bebroadened. The next logical step, IWMI researcherssay, is to replicate the small transboundary tributarycooperation in other places, and encourage regionalorganizations to set up special funds to support suchefforts. In the words of IWMI’s Wegerich: “This projecthas the potential to trigger wider cooperation and actuallybuild cooperation from the grassroots.”IWMI’s transboundary water management approachIWMI generally takes a basin-scale approach to improvewater management for food production, livelihoods andthe environment. In the volatile Ferghana Valley in centralAsia, IWMI has taken a ‘second best’ approach – workingto develop cooperation along small transboundarytributaries where decisions are made locally andinfrastructure is shared. The hope is that such bottom-upcooperation can be replicated on a broader scale.IWMI’s research on transboundary issues focuses on fivemain areas:• Creating analytical tools and resources that assistresearchers, policymakers and practitioners inassessing and managing transboundary river basins.An example is the collection of historical watermanagement agreements. 7• Identifying and answering research questions central tothe improved management of transboundary waters.• Undertaking research projects aimed at developingpractical policy and management recommendations atthe local level as well as generic suggestions with globalrelevance.• Developing partnerships with institutions throughresearch activities and involving and supportinggraduate students and interns interested intransboundary water research.• Ensuring rigour in its work by publishing findings in majorinternational, peer-reviewed journals.[ 56 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTEfficient and effective cooperation inthe River Rhine catchmentDr J. Cullman, Federal Institute of Hydrology, Germany and Chairperson of UNESCO International Hydrology Programme;Eric Sprokkereef and Ute Menke, Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, Rijkswaterstaat-CHR Secretariat, The NetherlandsThe International Commission for the Hydrology of theRhine Basin (CHR) 1 was founded in 1970 by the NationalCommittees of Switzerland, Austria, Germany, France,Luxembourg and the Netherlands in the framework of the UnitedNations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO) International Hydrological Decade. It is responsiblefor carrying out the UNESCO recommendation to strengthenand to support cooperation in the Rhine catchment area andother river catchments.CHR’s mission is to foster knowledge about the hydrology of theRhine river basin and to contribute to the solution of transboundaryhydrological problems. The commission coordinates diversejoint researches and often functions as a feedback group. An importantaspect is the exchange of data, methods and information aswell as the development of standards. CHR has no connections topolitics in the various member states. As a relatively small group,it can act quite fast, contributing to decision-making processes.CHR involves mainly scientific institutes focused on the developmentand implementation of hydrological measures to ensure sustainable developmentof the Rhine basin. Activities take place within the frameworkof the UNESCO International Hydrological Programme (IHP) and theThe Rhine fall near the city of Schaffhausen at high discharge, 11 June, 2006Image: CHRHydrological and the World Meteorological Organization(WMO) Water Resources Programme. Working alliancesundertake research on various themes such as:• hydrological interests in water economy andflood control• sediment management• hydrological forecasts and models• comparison of methods and measuring equipment• studies on climatic changes and their possible effects• registration of the interactive relationships betweeninfluencing factors on the hydrological regime ofthe Rhine basin.CHR creates synergy through cooperation in variousstudies in the catchment. Its two publication seriesfocus on the findings of the official CHR workinggroups (Series I) and CHR-related work or researchincorporating financial contribution only (Series II).The Rhine catchment areaThe Rhine’s catchment 2 of 185,000 km 2 is home to around60 million people and comprises nine states includinga small tip of Italian territory north of Chiavenna,Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Austria, Germany, France,Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Of the 1,230km course of the river, a stretch of about 800 km fromBasel to Rotterdam is navigable. This stretch is one of thebusiest waterways in the world, playing a vital role for itsriparians in terms of transporting goods.The main river and its tributaries supply countlessindustrial plants with process water and provide coolingwater for numerous thermal power stations, both nuclearand fossil-fuel driven. In water-operated power plants orpower plants on reservoirs of the catchment, however,the power of the streaming water produces a substantialamount of electricity. Furthermore, the Rhine is a majorsupplier of drinking and process water. Stuttgart and othermunicipalities in the Neckar region are supplied throughlines from Lake Constance, while numerous other citiesand communities are provided with river bank filtrate. Inthe end, the river has to absorb all sewage, albeit cleaned.Despite these strains imposed by civilization, ‘the romanticRhine’ continues to attract tourists from across the world.For all these reasons, it is crucial to know whether andhow the water levels of the Rhine will change in future. But[ 57 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTwell-founded prognoses can only be made if the processes in the riversystem are understood. This, in turn, requires a thorough knowledge ofthe historical development of hydrological parameters. Therefore, CHRhas undertaken a detailed analysis of changes in the run-off regimes ofthe Rhine and its tributaries in the twentieth century and their potentialcauses: natural climate fluctuations, anthropogenic climate change anddirect human interventions such as river regulations and embankments,barrage weirs, reservoirs, water transfers and changes in land use.Run-off regimeThe flow of a watercourse, whether it is a small brook or large river,strongly depends on the amount of precipitation in the catchment.The water volume that is not lost to evaporation or plant transpirationeventually runs off; fluctuations in run-off are controlled by thetemporal distribution of precipitation and evaporation. If precipitationfalls as snow, it is released with a time delay when melting orstored as ice in glaciers for even longer periods of time. In a nutshell,‘run-off regime’ means the intra-annual run-off of a stream that canbe regularly expected.The major tributaries in Germany (Neckar, Main and Moselle)consistently show a pluvial regime. Due to the distribution of rainfalland the seasonal differences in evaporation intensity, meanrun-off reaches its maximum in the winter months and its minimumin August and September. As the river proceeds, the run-off regimeof the Rhine reflects the natural and man-made impacts resultingfrom its gradual catchment expansion. In the process, none of thejoining tributaries succeeds in imposing its own regime characteron it – but the plethora of feeding rivers downstream increases thecomplexity of the run-off regime in the Rhine.Owing to the dominant alpine influence, the Basel Rhine gaugeshows a typical nival regime that is superimposed by tributaries with apluvial character further downstream. As these tributaries bear significantlyless water than the Rhine, the basic nival character of the Rhineregime continues to exist up to the confluence with the Main river.Not until reaching the Middle Rhine do the rivers Main and Moselleeventually cause major changes. From the Andernach gauging stationRestoration of gravel banks of the Thur River, a tributary of the Rhine in SwitzerlandImage: CHRonwards, pluvial elements prevail. Now the highestrun-off occurs in February, the lowest in September.Past achievementsThe Rhine Alarm model was developed with ICPR. Itwas initiated by the Rhine Ministers conference afterthe Sandoz accident in 1986 and accepted duringthe 8th Conference of Rhine Ministers. Participatinginstitutes are the Federal Office for the Environmentin Bern (Switzerland), the Service de la Navigation inStrasbourg (France), the Federal Institute of Hydrology(BfG)in Koblenz, the Albert-Ludwigs-University ofFreiburg in Germany and Dutch organizations such asRijkswaterstaat in Lelystad and the Technical Universityand Deltares in Delft.The Rhine Alarm model delivers effective forecastsat various alarm stations in cases of strong water pollutionin the catchment. Forecasts of the travel time anddistribution of harmful substances are highly importantfor all water users such as water boards and watersupply companies, in order to implement the necessarymeasures in time.The model covers the Rhine River from LakeConstance to the North Sea, including the main tributariessuch as the Aar, Neckar, Main and Moselle. Inputto the model calculations includes the location andconditions of the initial pollution, decomposition anddrift capacity of the harmful substances, discharges and/or water levels, geometry and dispersion. Calibration ofthe model was done by tracer tests. The model calculates,the concentration as a function of time as well asthe point of time and scope of the maximum concentrationfor every alarm station along the Rhine. Theforecasts of progress time and concentrations are accurateto about 89 per cent and 95 per cent respectively.The knowledge of the Rhine Alarm model was incorporatedinto the set-up of the model for the DanubeRiver. For the Danube model a cross-flow of the pollutionmodule has been implemented which is alsoincluded in the latest version of the Rhine Alarm model.So, what has started with a catastrophe in the past hasresulted in a well-implemented alarm model whichhelps ensure better, timely reaction in urgent situations.Knowledge exchange with other river basins (SouthAmerica to the Rio Bermejo) in Argentina took placethrough a twinning project, with a site-mission and asymposium held in 2007. 3 CHR’s counterpart was theBinational Commission for the Development of theBermejo River Basin (COBINABE) in Argentina. Duringthe field visit the sediment problems in the upper part andmiddle reach of the Bermejo river basin were addressed.The basin of the Rio Bermejo has various types ofclimates, with precipitation ranging from 200 mm/yearto over 2,000 mm/year within a few dozen kilometres.Population density is quite low in terms of centralEuropean countries. Main traffic routes are constructedalong the river stretches and are prone to natural hazardactivities. Soil loss and adequate land use is a majorproblem for local populations in the river basin. Traffic[ 58 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: CHRThe river bed in the Rio Bermejo basinroutes are prone to fall out of function due to natural hazards. Manyriver defence works have been undertaken in the past to locallyreduce natural hazard impact, such as retention dams to protectthe main road from lateral landslides. The river system shows avariety of natural hazards. Lateral hazards such as debris flows andlandslides constantly threaten to dam the main river, causing a lakebehind the obstacle and an outburst to infrastructure below it. Someprecipitation and discharge measurements are done, but the densernetwork needed for detailed information does not exist. Therefore,information about precipitation and discharge are not sufficientlyavailable for local use.Regarding the possibilities for future cooperation betweenCOBINABE and CHR it was stated that in the Rhine basin a lot ofexperiences are available in the field of economic, social and ecologicalimpacts of sediments. Much information related to institutional,administrative and legal aspects can be transferred and adapted toother regions. COBINABE emphasized that many investigationswere carried out in the Bermejo basin, but that many unsolvedproblems remain. Exchange of know-how, methods and proceduresbetween CHR and COBINABE could help to solve these problems,and COBINABE is interested in working together on a project basis.Although cooperation between CHR and COBINABE would be veryhelpful, it has not been realized until now. 4Current projectsThe contract for a study on ‘Discharge percentage from snowand glacier melt in the Rhine River and its tributaries’ was signedin December 2012. The project team is a consortium comprisingthe Albert Ludwigs University of Freiburg, the University ofZurich and consultancy HYDRON GmbH. Important from anorganizational aspect is the incorporation of the Federal State ofBaden-Württemberg, through the State Institute for Environment,Measurements and Nature Conservation (LUBW) in the project.LUBW provides the high-resolution water management modelLARSIM 1x1 km.The present activities focus on the collection andaccessibility of data sources, and on the methodologicalaspects of the data processing. The latter relates toquestions concerning climatic reconstruction since 1901;processing of snow data in the catchment up to Basel (bycooperation partner SLF-CH); and activities related to(empirical) data analysis with a conceptual aim. In Basel,work is in progress to develop a suitable method for thetransfer of snow water equivalents that are calculatedfrom snow heights in a plain area to the ‘real’ catchment,especially for high mountain regions. Regarding empiricaldata analysis, representative influencing variables forthe melting and accumulation processes of ice and snowin the upper catchments should be identified throughthe catchment overlapping comparison of processes. Thismight help to transfer gained knowledge to modelleddata series in a later stage of the project.Parallel consultations between the BfG and HYDRONare taking place about a project-orientated furtherdevelopment of the model LARSIM-ME (5x5 km). Inthis part of the Rhine basin north of Basel, a separateBfG contract will be assigned to improve height zoning.In this way more height zones are designated in the gridelements and temperatures are recalculated, resultingin better reproduction of the modelled snow dynamics.After the model improvement through height zoningsimulation, a simplified uncertainty analysis will becarried out, so different model variants can be comparedand additional calibrations performed if necessary.‘From source to mouth – A Sediment Budget ofthe River Rhine’ is a project that runs from July 2012until the end of 2014. Under the auspices of CHR,BfG, in cooperation with the Aachen UniversityInstitute of Hydraulic Engineering and Water ResourceManagement, is in charge of the project.[ 59 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: CHRImage: CHRRiver regulation works in the Lütschine basin in SwitzerlandThe works in the Polder Ingelheim, north of Mainz in GermanyThe starting point for morphological analyses is bed level surveys.These are combined with sediment transport measurements in orderto get data on the sediment load and on the mechanism of sedimenttransport. Echo soundings and transport measurements willnot answer questions such as where the sediments come from andwhere are they going, or how changes in one part of the catchmentare related to other regions. Therefore, a sediment budget is needed,incorporating the collection of data and analyses to check the qualityof measurements and available datasets, fill in the data gaps andidentify sources and sinks. This action incorporates quite a challengebecause maximum data density is found in the navigation channelbut data density is at a minimum next to the navigation channel, infloodplains and groyne fields and at tributaries. Another challenge liesin the varying quality and methods used in the several river reachesand countries. Due to the number of existing gaps (data, data gapsand a need for regional data), a variety of assumptions were made.A strategy has been developed based on a status quo combined withideas on how to improve the situation around the gaps.Continuation of the RheinBlick2050 study is planned under theumbrella of ‘Climate impact studies in the Rhine basin’. Comparedto the regional climate models used in RheinBlick2050, 5 there isnow a much larger ensemble (~200 runs) of new global climatemodels available in the Coupled Model Intercomparison ProjectPhase 5 (CIMP5) data repository. These models are also used forthe Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) FifthAssessment Report (AR5), to be published in 2013.The Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI) is analysingthe CIMP5 data in order to use it in updating the KNMI climate scenarios.Cooperation with BfG and Deltares has begun to analyse this dataset and calculate corresponding river discharges for representative setsof runs. The new KNMI scenarios will be published in autumn 2013.The scope of this cooperation is, however, broader. It targets thecomparison methodologies and coordination involved in derivinga common set of climate and discharge scenarios for the internationalbasins of the Elbe, Rhine and Meuse. It is largely based onthe climate model output used for IPCC AR5. Eachinstitution brings its own expertise, observed data andmodels. One question to be answered with this analysisrelates to the RheinBlick2050 results and the extentto which these are still valid with regard to IPCC AR5.CHR eventsIn recent decades CHR has organized several conferences,symposia and workshops, with themes selected from ascientific point of view or as the closing events of large CHRstudies. They include workshops on sediment transport(2003, 2007 and 2008), climate change (2003), extremedischarges (2005) and flood forecasting and ensemblepredictions (2006 and 2010), as well as the closing symposiumof the RheinBlick2050 project in 2010. 6Future projects and tasksIn spring 2014 CHR will organize the new first springseminar in combination with biannual CHR meetingin Austria. The series of spring seminars will start withthe ‘Impact of socioeconomic changes to the dischargeregime in the Rhine catchment’. The seminar outputmay lead to a new project.Concerning the future, the tasks agreed during CHR’sfoundation are still valid and important, while thecommission’s approach has become increasingly multifunctionaland multidisciplinary. The need for enoughwater of good quality, as well as for maintaining a safeenvironment for livelihoods, is still growing.Another special event will come in 2020, when a newmonograph on the Rhine will be published celebratingthe 50th anniversary of CHR – and commemorating thefact that all CHR member states will have been takingcare of the catchment and solving problems togetherfor half a century.[ 60 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTSharing water in Australia:a collaborative endeavourJames Cameron, CEO, National Water Commission, AustraliaSharing water between competing users continues to beone of the world’s hallmark challenges of the twenty-firstcentury. This is no less true in Australia, the driest inhabitedcontinent on Earth.Australia has a challenging hydrology. Highly variable and oftenirregular rainfall and high rates of evaporation result in the lowestrun-off of inhabited continents. About 65 per cent of Australia’srun-off is in the three drainage divisions located in the sparselypopulatedtropical north. Irrigated agriculture is concentrated inthe Murray-Darling Basin to the south-east where only 6.1 per centof national run-off occurs. The basin comprises about 14 per centof Australia’s land area, accounts for 65 per cent of Australia’s totalirrigated land and provides 39 per cent of the total Australian valueof agricultural commodities. 1Most inland Australian rivers are naturally intermittentand are unreliable water sources. The ratio betweenthe maximum and minimum annual flows in Australianrivers is much higher than most major rivers across theworld. For the Yangtze in China, that ratio is two. Forthe Darling River in Australia, the ratio is almost 5,000.Groundwater usage also varies from region to region,on average supplying around 30 per cent of total wateruse in Australia. Consequently, Australia depends onwater storage more than any other developed countryand stores more water per head of population thananywhere else in the world. Yet Australia has relativelyfew sites for efficient dams. The Australian continent ischaracterized by a lack of high mountains, and manywater storages are inefficient, shallow and wide.Image: courtesy of the Murray-Darling Basin AuthorityIrrigation of the Murray River[ 61 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTDistribution of Australia’s mean annual run-offSource: Water and the Australian Economy, April 1999Australia, like other countries, faces increasing pressures for waterto be made available for productive agriculture, economic growth,the growing needs of cities and the environment. Not only are thedemands on water resources escalating, but a changing climatemeans that in many regions there is less water to go around.Managing water and supply security in Australia is a sharedchallenge. It has many players, very different local circumstancesand no single government agency has sole authority.Unlike international transboundary water issues that focus onintercountry negotiations, Australia’s transboundary water issuesare domestic – but no less complex. Under Australian water lawsit is not the federal government that determines the conditions onwhich water is available for use, but the six state and two territorygovernments. Local government also has an important role in waterdelivery, stormwater and drainage, which increasingly feature inurban supply and demand management.Yet there are national imperatives for water management. Mostnotably in Australia, these have been to share physical waterresources among states, to protect nationally significant environmentalassets and to foster interstate water markets. Attempts toachieve these goals have been complicated by different legislativeand administrative arrangements between states, and by the differentcharacter of hydrological systems and water-dependent ecosystemsboth within and between states.Following the federation of Australia’s states in 1901, initialsteps towards intergovernmental cooperation on water resourcesfocused on developing water supply systems and increasing waterstorage capacity. By the 1980s, the limitations of this approach werebeing observed in many parts of rural Australia – with diminishingreturns on subsidized infrastructure, rapidly rising water extractionchallenging the capacity of water systems, and increasing andobvious environmental degradation.In the 1990s, environmental degradation saw a1,000 km-long toxic blue-green algae bloom in theDarling River system and increasing algal bloomsthroughout the whole Murray-Darling Basin.Increasing water demand was also contributingto rising water salinity, declining biodiversity andless frequent beneficial flooding in floodplains andsurrounding streams. Recognizing this, governingjurisdictions agreed to cap their allocations forconsumptive use from the system at 1994 levels. Thecap meant that new surface water demand could onlybe satisfied through trading. This important policydecision recognized that the limits of sustainabilityhad been overreached.This period was also marked by significant microeconomicreform in Australia and water became part ofthat broader appetite for national change. In 1994, allgovernments committed to the Council of AustralianGovernments Water Reform Framework, which wasdesigned to make water management more environmentallysustainable and economically efficient. Thekey elements of subsequent reforms were foundedin that agreement. They included recognition of thewater needs of the environment, handing irrigationsystems over to irrigators to manage, tradable waterrights, and the separation of the regulatory, policy andservice delivery functions of water authorities.In the 1990s the nation began to feel the effects ofwhat would become the 12-year-long ‘Millennium’drought, triggering a renewal of focus on effectivemanagement of Australia’s resources. In some communities,the drought came close to putting water for basic[ 62 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: National Water Commission, Arthur MosteadIndigenous engagementThe NWI is the first intergovernmental water agreementin Australia that explicitly recognizes the interestsof indigenous people in water management. Since2004 most Australian jurisdictions have establishedconsultative mechanisms intended to engage indigenouspeople in water planning, and there is increasedrecognition of the cultural values of water resources.In 2010 the National Water Commission brokered theformation of the First People’s Water Engagement Council.The group’s remit was to provide a vehicle for Aboriginalvoices and water aspirations to be heard.The council consulted widely with stakeholders and heldits first water summit in 2012. From these processes, thecouncil developed policy and advisory statements. Whenthe council ended its tenure in 2012, an Indigenous WaterAdvisory Council was formed to continue building on theFirst People’s Water Engagement Council’s initial work,taking on an even larger role as national adviser to thefederal government.The advisory council, along with other indigenousworking groups, indigenous community facilitationnetworks, and projects aimed at improving drinking waterand increasing research opportunities, will continue toprovide an important foundation for improving knowledgeand understanding of indigenous Australians’ waterrelatedcultural, social and economic aspirations.The NWI explicitly recognizes the interests of indigenous people in water managementhuman needs at risk – a position that shocked Australians. Thedrought not only highlighted the vulnerability of businesses andcommunities, it also demonstrated the implications of neglectingthe water needs of the environment.In 2000, a major national land and water audit found that almosta third of the continent’s surface and groundwater resources wereclose to being overused, or were overused compared to their estimatedsustainable flow regimes. 2The Council of Australian Governments again stepped in. In 2004,the council members signed off on the Intergovernmental Agreementon a National Water Initiative (NWI), which set out detailed commitmentsto improve institutional water sharing arrangements and toovercome some of the seemingly intractable differences between statesthat shared water resources. It established as an overarching goal theoptimization of economic, social and environmental outcomes.Under the NWI the Council of Australian Governments created anew body – the National Water Commission – to oversee implementationof the reform programme and to provide regular reviews.This type of institutionalized, regular review framework is unusualand has been instrumental in driving ongoing improvements in thedelivery of a truly national water reform agenda.The NWI comprises different types of commitments that togetherwill improve water management in Australia. There are state-specificcommitments and commitments applicable to groups of states, suchas water trading among the southern Murray-Darling Basin states.There are also commitments that can only be delivered throughcooperation by all states.Just as importantly, the NWI commits governments to genuinelyengage with people and groups affected by water managementchanges when developing water plans that balance the competingneeds and values of water users with the desired outcomes for theenvironment in particular water systems. This is beneficial becauseit makes decisions regarding water allocation and use transparent,and provides an opportunity for interested parties to bepart of the decision-making process.In the eight years since the NWI was signed, the agreementhas come to be recognized internationally as a modelfor sound water governance, for addressing the challengesof cross-jurisdictional management of shared resources,and for harnessing the power of markets and price signalsto encourage efficient water use and investment.In an assessment of Australia’s environmentalperformance since 1998, the Organisation forEconomic Co-operation and Development concludedthat the NWI, backed by significant governmentinvestment, was delivering real progress towardreform, including setting environmental flowregimes. 3 As the Australian State of the EnvironmentReport 2011 4 observed, “the past decade has been themost dynamic and significant in modern Australia’swater history. It has been a period of ambitious waterpolicy reform at the same time as the worst andlongest drought Australia has ever seen. There havealso been massive public and private investmentsin water infrastructure, significant new foundationsfor water knowledge at a national scale, and thewidespread acceptance by the public and by governmentsthat Australia’s climate has changed and willcontinue to change.”The Australian approach acknowledges that successfulreform requires cross-agency and cross-governmentcollaborative effort. Behind these concepts are cooperative,multilayered and evolving relationships; albeitrelationships underpinned by a sound legislative andaccountability framework that is supported by robustsystems and processes.[ 63 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTRegional water cooperation in theHindu Kush Himalayan regionArun B. Shrestha, Shahriar M. Wahid, Ramesh A. Vaidya, Mandira S. Shrestha and David J. Molden,International Centre for Integrated Mountain DevelopmentThe Hindu Kush Himalayan (HKH) region is a vast complexof high mountains, intermontane valleys and plateaus;it contains some of the world’s tallest peaks with over60,000 km 2 of glaciers and about 760,000 km 2 of snow cover.This snow and ice represents a massive store of freshwaterwhich supports food production, domestic water supply andsanitation, health, energy, tourism, industry, and the functioningof ecosystems. The region’s 10 major river basins – theAmu Darya, Brahmaputra, Ganges, Indus, Irrawaddy, Mekong,Salween, Tarim, Yangtze and Yellow – connect upstream anddownstream areas in terms of culture, communication, trade,commerce and resource management and, directly or indirectly,provide goods and services to 1.3 billion people including the210 million that live in the HKH region.While the river basins have been sources of great civilizations androutes of sociocultural movement, water-related transboundary cooperationin the modern era has been inadequate compared with manylarge river basins around the world such as the Danube, Mekong,Murray Darling, Nile and Rhine. Fortunately the governmentsof the HKH region increasingly recognize thatsustainable development of the economic potential ofthe river systems – for domestic use, fisheries, hydropower,navigation and irrigation – can reduce poverty,improve livelihoods, conserve ecosystems and contributeto drought and flood management in the region.Responding to the challenges of contemporary watermanagement in the region will depend on regional watercooperation as an important mechanism to supportinformed decision-making. It will require a holisticunderstanding and appreciation of the services providedby water at the local, regional and global scales. It will alsorequire understanding of the changing water dynamics andthreats to water resource endowments in the HKH region,particularly in light of the impacts of climate change.The nature of the hydrological regime determines wateravailability and quality, which are variable and continuouslychanging in time and space. In the HKH regionImage: Alex TreadwayImage: Alex TreadwayKhapalu Valley, Pakistan: the HKH region is a vast complex of mountains,valleys and plateausKhumbu, Nepal: snow and ice represents a massive store offreshwater for the HKH region[ 65 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTMap of 10 major river basins and seasonal variations in flow of selected rivers in the HKH regionDischarge [m 3 /s]50,00040,00030,00020,000Kabul atWarshakDischarge [m 3 /s]50,00040,00030,00020,000Indus atBesham QuilaDischarge [m 3 /s]50,00040,00030,00020,000Brahmaputraat Bahudarabad10,00010,00010,00001 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112Time [Month]01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112Time [Month]01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112Time [Month]AmudaryaTarimIndusGangesBrahmaputraSalweenYellow RiverYangtseDischarge [m 3 /s]50,00040,00030,00020,000Yangtze atHonkauIrrawadyMekong10,00001 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112Time [Month]Discharge [m 3 /s]50,00040,00030,00020,000Ganges atFarakkaDischarge [m 3 /s]50,00040,00030,00020,000Irrawadi atSagaingDischarge [m 3 /s]50,00040,00030,00020,000Mekong atKratao10,00010,00010,00001 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112Time [Month]01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112Time [Month]01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112Time [Month]Source: ICIMODthe peaks in water availability usually do not coincide with the highdemand periods. The eastern river basins depend mainly on monsoonprecipitation, while the western basins are dominated by westerlies andheavily reliant on meltwater. While the region is known for its abundanceof water resources, some areas are already water scarce, eitherphysically (with more than 75 per cent of river flows withdrawn foragriculture, industry and domestic purposes) or economically (meaningthat less than 25 per cent of water from rivers is withdrawn for humanpurposes, but significant improvements are needed in existing waterinfrastructure and management to make the water resources availablefor use). The western Himalayas and a large part of the Indus basinare recognized as physically water stressed areas. Large parts of theBrahmaputra, Ganges and Salween basins are categorizedas areas of economic water scarcity.Climate change and associated changes could havea serious impact on the stability of water supply in theregion. Observed warming in the region ranges from0.01 to 0.06° C per year. The Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change (IPCC) has projected that temperatureswill be about 3° C warmer than the baseline bythe middle of the twenty-first century and about 4° Cwarmer by the end of the century. Models project about20 and 30 per cent increases in annual precipitation inthe eastern Himalayas, with increased interannual and[ 66 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: Alex TreadwayImage: Birendra BajracharyaPanjshir Valley, Afghanistan: water management has traditionally been handled atstate level, denying the transboundary nature of the resourceSettlements along the Indus river: river basins have been sources ofgreat civilizations and routes of sociocultural movementseasonal variability by the middle and end of the century respectively.The recession of HKH glaciers is a matter of great concern, particularlysince the release of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4)in 2007. Several recent studies indicate that the rates of retreat are lessthan those originally suggested by the AR4, but across the region moreglaciers show shrinking trends than advancing trends.The region is also undergoing remarkable socioeconomic transformation.Consequently water demand has increased over the pastdecades and will continue to increase into the future. For example,the International Water Management Institute projects that in SouthAsia the annual water withdrawals for agriculture will increase by9 per cent between 2000 and 2050, while non-agricultural wateruse will increase by a factor of five in the same period under anoptimistic ‘comprehensive assessment’ scenario. Such a dramaticincrease, coupled with environmental and socioeconomic changes,gives reason for major concern about the availability of an adequatequantity and quality of water to meet the demand.Water vulnerability is uneven across the region. The Amu Darya andIndus river basins appear to be the most vulnerable to changes in wateravailability. Furthermore, water vulnerability has different causes; onestudy showed that vulnerability in India and Bangladesh stems fromhydrological and ecological factors, while in Nepal it is linked moreto poverty and lack of economic development. Poor political governanceand underinvestment in the water sector add to vulnerability inBangladesh and Nepal. Overall, Bangladesh was found to be the mostvulnerable country, and Nepal that with the least capacity to adapt.The changing HKH waterscape amply illustrates that the managementchallenges of today and tomorrow greatly differ from those ofthe past. Resource utilization today is vastly expanded and intensifiedthrough new technology, emerging markets and systems of governance,with decisions in one place influencing people and resourceselsewhere. Thus there is a strong case for interaction and reconciliationof the interests of the various actors in the region. Amore focused cooperative approach will entail a shift inthe water resource development paradigm from ‘developmentonly’ to ‘cooperative development and management’in addressing water needs.To date, water resource management approachesin the HKH river basins have not fully accounted forthe social, cultural and political implications of watermanagement and climate change adaptation interventions.Water management has traditionally been handledat the state level, denying the transboundary nature ofthe resource endowment and the need to accommodatethe interests of many actors, especially in addressingchallenges extending beyond stringent political boundaries.The rigid hierarchical management regimes do notsupport flexible, cooperative approaches for coping withthe ever-changing environmental and sociopoliticallandscape, especially changes related to transboundarywaters and climate change. Furthermore, such regimesare not effective for meeting local or regional needs. Thehighly regulated data and information sharing protocolsare counterproductive to good governance and failto support informed decision-making. Lack of cooperationin information exchange and in the sharing ofappropriate technology seriously hinders water resourcedevelopment and management in the region.The ecological and sociopolitical issues related to watermanagement in the region are complex and do not easilylend themselves to agreement and collaboration amongcountries. A case in point is ‘green’ hydropower development.The hydropower potential of the HKH regionis estimated to be more than 500 GW, much of which[ 67 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTis not harnessed. While touted by some as an important ‘passport outof poverty’ in the face of rising energy demands and fossil fuel prices,green hydropower development remains controversial and contested inthe region, partly because of lack of knowledge of risks due to environmentalchange such as glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) ormeltwater change; concerns about impacts on the water regime (suchas downstream water availability) and on fisheries, livelihoods, aquaticecosystems and environmental services as a whole; and unresolvedmechanisms of benefit sharing. At the regional level, hydropowerprojects raise new questions about sharing transboundary waterresources between countries, which has long been a source of dispute.Yet the ferocity of the debate around hydropower development shouldnot defeat efforts to understand how development trajectories mightreallocate regional land and water resources, incomes and risks, and thevarious consequences for different social groups in time and space. Thechallenge is largely to address the question of how different countriescan initiate and sustain coordinated and collaborative actions to harnesshydropower. This will require attention to the structure and interrelationshipsof organizations, sharing of strategies, and a sophisticatedmonitoring, communication and coordination mechanism.Thus it is clear that regional cooperation requires both anadequate understanding of the potential hydro-economic benefitsand a governance framework for extensive regional engagement forwater resources management to overcome national or bilateral interestsand address shared concerns in a concerted manner.The notion of regional cooperation to ensure sustainable and equitableuse of natural resources is not new. Regional strategic politicaland economic processes offer opportunities to link water managementto emerging regional economic, energy and food securityissues. Indeed the heads of state of the South Asian Association forRegional Cooperation at successive summits have reiterated the needto strengthen and intensify regional cooperation to preserve, protectand manage the diverse and fragile ecosystems of South Asia, and toaddress the challenges posed by climate change and natural disasters.The countries of the HKH region have had some success in sharingreal-time hydrological data, primarily through bilateral agreements,and this has proved useful in flood forecasting. However, achievementshave been limited with regard to the sharing of real-time dataand information on a regional scale, so critical for flood management.Water cooperation has often been hindered by the lack of a soundknowledge base on the availability of resources and their distributionover space and time, and a lack of understanding on the impacts ofvarious drivers of change on the supply of and demand for resources– for example, the impacts of climate change on stream flow variability,sedimentation and potential GLOF events. Regional hubs suchas the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development(ICIMOD) – whose members are the eight countries of the HinduKush Himalayan region (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China,India, Myanmar, Nepal and Pakistan) – can promote collaborationamong knowledge institutions in the region and contribute to thedevelopment of the requisite knowledge and understanding. Suchregional centres can also facilitate representation and participationand provide technical support for regional discussions. Over the pastthree decades, ICIMOD has provided a common platform for regionalcooperation where policy makers, experts, planners and practitionersexchange scientific data, information, ideas and perspectives towardsachieving common solutions at regional levels. Water issues, along withconcerns of livelihoods and ecosystems, are integrated across ICIMOD’sregional programmes addressing adaptation to change, transboundarylandscapes, river basins, cryosphere and atmosphere, andregional information collection and sharing. ICIMOD alsosupports transboundary collaborative research among itsregional member countries through its projects. Suchregional initiatives could be further strengthened throughestablishment of an adequately mandated regional groupor body, hosted by a relevant organization, to independentlyfacilitate and coordinate regional dialogue andstrategic processes of regional water governance.At the river basin level, where externalities are unidirectionalfrom upstream to downstream, early successin regional cooperation can be achieved by identifyingpriority actions expected to provide common benefitsacross borders, for example hazard risk reduction. Thenon-structural flood management approach of providingend-to-end flood forecasting and warning services hasthe greatest potential for regional cooperation. Greatersharing of knowledge on the cryosphere is another areaof potential cooperation that could improve understandingof cryosphere dynamics and possible downstreamimpacts. This is especially important for river basinshighly dependent on meltwater.Regional cooperation may also provide importantopportunities for overcoming the economic, environmental,technological, financial and institutional barriersto hydropower development. Power trade and exchangebetween the Himalayan region and the core industrial beltsof China and India could improve the capacity utilizationfactor of the power plants in the region, thus enabling thecountries to supply power to their households at affordableprices. To enable the less industrialized countries inthe region to trade power with the more industrializedones, cross-border grid interconnections are vital.In this regard there have been positive experiencesin the region. Bhutan and India have engaged in somebilateral cooperation in developing hydropower.Construction companies in China and India have richexperience in hydropower development. Power gridinterconnections in India were expanded from the localand provincial levels to the regional and national levelsin the 1990s, facilitating cross-border interconnectionsto the grid networks. Furthermore, India has promotedthe establishment of power trading companies, bothpublic and private. More recently, electricity exchangemarkets have also been started in India.Another entry point for cooperation may lie in transformingnatural systems of water storage. The region isblessed with a host of such systems including snow coverand permafrost, glacial lakes, wetlands and groundwateraquifers. Transforming natural systems into planned activesystems may have important externalities for downstreamusers including control of uncertain river flows, rechargingof groundwater aquifers, sediment trapping, nutrientrecycling and maintenance of the quality and quantityof the water cycle. However, the cost is high relative toreturns, and the externalities are typically undervaluedand not compensated. The introduction of policies forcompensation for ecosystem services could help mountainpeople maintain healthy lives in a healthy environment[ 68 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTSusceptibility of 10 river basins of the HKH region to water scarcity and potential adaptation strategiesDGEDGDEDDGUPSyr Darya (SD)GDFPRPEDUPDGFPGDRPUPAmu Darya (AD)RPYellow (YE)FPDGDGIndus (IN)EDGDPopulation (million)< 1415 - 2324 - 2526 - 4142 - 5152 - 7071 - 162163 - 203204 - 432433 - 601EDUPFPGDRPEDUPGanges (GA)DGPotential causes for future scarcityDG = dependence on glacier meltGD = groundwater depletionRP = reservoir potentialFP = future precipitationED = projected economic development in termsof GDP and population growthFPGDRPUPFPEDUPRPBrahmaputra (BR)DGIrrawaddy (IR)GDFPSalween (SA)RPDG Mekong (ME)EDEDGDUPFPRPYangtze (YA)UPDGFPEDUPGDRP´0 250 500 1,000 1,500KilometresRadar charts show qualitative ranking between low susceptibility and/or large coping capacity (1) and high susceptibility and/or small coping capacity (5).DGFPGDRPSource: By permission from Macmillan Publishers Ltd: Nature Geoscience (Immerzeel WW, Bierkens MFP (2012) Asia’s water balance. Nature Geoscience 5:841-842), © 2012while helping to maintain a steady supply of water for downstreamusers who are often across borders, especially in the HKH region.In conclusion, the HKH region holds vast reservoirs of water andthe origins of 10 major river systems. Climate change, directly throughimpacts on temperature and precipitation regimes and indirectlythrough changes in the cryosphere, is likely to have a serious impact onthe region’s water supply and pose a significant threat to environmentalsustainability and economic development. Regional water cooperationoffers an important mechanism to support natural resource management.The ideal of a transboundary river basin organization may not beenvisaged in the immediate future because of the geopolitical realitiesand the inherent complexity of coordinating the activities of the variousactors involved in shared water systems. However, important steps canstill be made based on recent global and regional processes and conventions.Development of the regional knowledge base on climate changeimpact, green hydropower development, flood risk reduction, earlywarning and sharing of information and knowledge provide promisingentry points for fostering water cooperation in the region. Knowledgehubs such as ICIMOD offer avenues for bringing together commercial,academic, government and civil society organizations to generate technicallysuperior schemes, help secure financial resources and facilitatebroader water cooperation.ICIMOD: fostering regional cooperation on waterThe HKH Hydrological Cycle Observation System (HKH-HYCOS)initiative aims to strengthen hydrometeorological monitoringcapacity and is establishing a regional flood information systembased on state-of-the-art communication and informationdissemination technology to save lives and property in theregion. By early 2013 the project had upgraded 24 realtimeobservation networks in four countries (Bangladesh,Bhutan, Nepal and Pakistan) and established an efficientdata transmission and acquisition system to enable accurateforecasting and effective early warning in the region.The Koshi Basin Programme, an example of ICIMOD’stransboundary river basin approach, promotes cooperationamong China, India and Nepal to maximize benefits such asirrigation and hydropower while minimizing adverse events suchas floods and landslides. The programme fosters interactionand reconciliation of the interests of the various actors at thebasin scale. Its approach to river basin management integratesscientific, economic, social and ecological knowledge to supportpolicy and decision-making to promote the sustainable use oftransboundary water resources and develop ‘win-win’ solutionsthat can be supported by all three countries. Particular focus isgiven to issues of gender and inequality and their linkages todrivers of change and river basin management, as well as to thepotential of employing incentive-based mechanisms to improvewater use efficiency and productivity.[ 69 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTThe Mekong River Basin: practical experiencesin transboundary water managementHans Guttman, Chief Executive Officer, Mekong River Commission SecretariatThe Mekong River Basin covers almost 800,000 km 2 . Themain stem of the river stretches some 4,800 km from theglaciers in the Chinese Himalayas, through Myanmar,Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Lao PDR), Thailand andCambodia, meeting the sea in the vast delta in southern VietNam. The river has high inter-seasonal variation in flows(varying up to fifty-fold between wet and dry seasons), fed by thesouth-west monsoon. The cycling of flooding and drought hascreated a rich ecology, but also difficult conditions for humansettlement. The Lower Mekong River Basin (LMB) comprisesover 60 million people.International cooperation in the use and development of the Mekong’swater was first formalized through the establishment of the MekongCommittee (MC) in 1957 under the auspices of the United Nations.The committee’s work was in part founded on the success of theTennessee Valley Authority in the United States, demonstrating howthe promotion of infrastructure development around water and othernatural resources can rapidly support development.The main focus of the MC was infrastructure developmentthrough the Indicative Basin Plan, which inthe 1970s proposed tributary and mainstream developmentin 180 projects. This included 700,000 hectares ofirrigation expansion and 3,300 MW of tributary hydropowerin the short term (10 years), and 17,000 MW ofhydropower, including mainstream dams and extendingnavigation by 800 km, in the long term.Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam established theInterim Mekong Committee in 1977; Cambodia wasto be absent for 14 years, restricting further considerationof actions on the mainstream. In 1995 theMekong Agreement, a new treaty signed by Cambodia,Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam, created the MekongRiver Commission (MRC) and provided a solid basisfor cooperation in the sustainable development of thebasin’s resources.In order to turn the Mekong Agreement into apractical framework for cooperation, MRC began toImage: MRCMekong overviewIf infrastructure development is promoted around water and other natural resources,it can rapidly support developmentSource: MRC[ 70 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTdevelop the Basin Development Plan (BDP), establishing a set ofprocedures for information exchange, water use monitoring, maintainingminimum flows, notification and consultation on wateruse projects and maintaining water quality. Parallel work wasundertaken on transboundary Environmental Impact Assessments(tbEIA), navigation protocols, regional fisheries management,flood warning and several different monitoring protocols.Practical experiencesA key area of active engagement between the MRC member countriesis the Basin Development Strategy. The mandate for the BDPis clearly framed in the Mekong Agreement. However, practicalengagement in developing the BDP did not begin until late 2001,six years after the agreement was signed. This was attributed todifferent perceptions on basin planning among riparians, weaknessesin the MRC Secretariat and differing views of developmentpartners on the BDP.The BDP’s first phase focused primarily on planning processesand tools including a knowledge base and modelling capability, onnon-controversial projects, and on building relationships. These arenecessary but insufficient conditions for cooperation and development,which also requires products – actions and outcomes.By 2006, when the second phase of the BDP was launched, theLMB had changed greatly, with water investments in nationalprogrammes taking place due to rapidly increasing water, foodand energy demand and growing private sector involvement,particularly in hydropower and commercial agriculture. Thisshift from dependence on multilateral banks and their safeguardsunderscored the need for strengthened national regulatory frameworks.The BDP moved beyond process alone to focus on waterdevelopment at national and regional levels, without returning tothe earlier almost exclusive focus on water infrastructure. Mekongdevelopment was happening and it was imperative toensure that the move to coordinated and cooperativedevelopment took full account of transboundary,social and environmental impacts and led to substantive,positive development outcomes.The primary products at the end of the BDP werea basin-wide cumulative impact assessment of thecountries’ water resources development plans and theBasin Development Strategy. The latter was a consensusproduct that described strategic priorities for basindevelopment and management, specifically in order tomove identified development opportunities to implementation.The difficulty encountered in the BDP isnot surprising considering the differences between thecountries – sovereign nations, national developmentplans, water and non-water sectors, differing developmentpriorities, varying levels of socioeconomicdevelopment and different political systems.In January 2011 15 years after the Mekong Agreementwas signed, the MRC Council adopted the integratedwater resources management (IWRM) based BasinDevelopment Strategy, which sets out the shared understandingsof the opportunities and risks of the nationalplans for water resources development in the LMB. Thestrategy established 15 strategic priorities to addressknowledge gaps, optimize development opportunitiesand minimize uncertainties and risks associated withthem. It is implemented through a Basin Action Plan.This was an important milestone, reintroducing a focuson water development to support poverty reductionand economic growth, and complementing the focus ofwater management.Image: MRCWater resources in the basin will play an important role in the development of the LMB countries[ 71 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTThe MRC Secretariat is overseeing the implementation of thestrategy, working with national line agencies, river basin organizationsand others. The third phase of BDP programme leadsthe work on addressing the avoidance and mitigation of adverseimpacts of water resources development and exploring a mechanismfor sharing the transboundary benefits, impacts and risks ofcurrent and planned developments.The implementation of the Basin Action Plan by MRC Programmesand national agencies provides a common direction for greater alignmentbetween regional and national planning, and the opportunityto decentralize the core river basin management function activitiesthat can be better implemented at the national level. Knowledgegaps are reducing, which will enrich the next update of the BasinDevelopment Strategy and enable MRC to better undertake itsmission to promote and coordinate sustainable development andmanagement of the basin’s water and related resources.Many of the central elements of the Basin Development Strategywill remain relevant in the next planning cycle (2016-2020).Stakeholder consultations indicate opportunities to broaden thescope of the strategy in line with commitments of MRC countries toenhance regional integration. MRC’s ongoing analysis of current andfuture options for regional benefit sharing will provide useful inputsin this regard. The updated strategy will also more clearly identifythe basin’s development opportunities, with a view to attractingfunding for priority projects.The Procedures for Notification, Prior Consultation andAgreement (PNPCA) were developed to address the issue ofkeeping tabs on the new projects using the basin’s water. For wateruse in the tributaries, the proponent country is required to notifythe other countries of its proposed use. For water use on the mainstream in the dry season, the proponent country is also requestedto initiate a prior consultation which aims to identify concernswith respect to impacts on neighbouring countries andreach agreement on how these can be avoided, minimizedor mitigated.Although over 40 projects on the tributaries havebeen notified, the first to go through a prior consultationwas the mainstream Xayaburi HydropowerProject proposed by Lao PDR in 2010. This triggereda process of sharing information and discussions aboutthe potential impact the project may have on otherriparian countries. In the six-month consultation,facilitated by the MRC Secretariat, the downstreamcountries of Cambodia and Viet Nam expressedconcern over the uncertainty of impacts and proposedthat further studies were undertaken before the projectwent ahead. At a final meeting in April 2011 the countriesdid not reach an agreement on measures to avoid,minimize and mitigate impacts (as was envisioned inthe PNPCA), but neither did the member countriesagree on whether the process was to be extended. Theissue was referred to the MRC Council (the highestlevel in the MRC cooperation), which agreed thatfurther studies were needed on the sustainable developmentof the Mekong, but did not address the issueof completing the PNPCA process.During 2012 and continuing in 2013, the LaoGovernment engaged international consultants to assistin addressing the concerns expressed by the other ripariancountries and made several modifications to thedesign to reduce the impacts on sediment transport,fish migration, dam safety and navigation locks. In late2012, it decided to go ahead with the project. Althoughthe process did not proceed as envisaged in the PNPCAImage: MRCImage: MRCThe Basin Action Plan provides a common direction for greater alignment betweenregional and national planningMRC provides a practical framework for its member countries tocooperate in developing the basin’s resources[ 72 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTas the member countries did not reach an agreement, it allowed Laoto hear the concerns from its neighbours and respond by modifyingthe design to reduce the negative impacts. The MRC Secretariat isfacilitating continued information sharing on the project.A further example of effective cooperation is the case for developmentof a bilateral agreement for the promotion of navigation betweenViet Nam and Cambodia. Although Cambodia is not a landlockedcountry, the capital Phnom Penh is situated along the Mekong River,some distance from the coast. Thus, a lot of the capital’s suppliesof imports have to either be trucked in from the coastal port ofSihanoukville (320 km from Phnom Penh) or shipped through theVietnamese delta of the Mekong upriver to Phnom Penh. The MekongAgreement provides for freedom of navigation. However, it is not easyto turn this general provision into a practical protocol for allowingmaritime vessels from overseas and inland barges between Cambodiaand Viet Nam, through the heavily populated delta in a structuredway which allows for free passage without opening up for ‘free-forall’smuggling, ensures enforceable regulations against accidents andpollution, and complies with customs and immigration requirements.In 1998 the governments of Cambodia and Viet Nam worked onan Agreement on Waterway Transportation for the navigational useof the Mekong River. However, the draft agreement, prepared byViet Nam, was not ratified by Cambodia. There is a clear mandateto promote navigation in the Mekong Agreement, and the MRCNavigation Strategy (2003) included a legal component whichwas considered important in promoting freedom of navigation andincreasing international trade opportunities for the MRC membercountries’ mutual benefit.In 2006 the governments of Cambodia and Viet Nam agreedthat MRC would enter the scene as main facilitator to draft a newnavigation agreement and assist in negotiating its contents. Thiswas successfully done through the establishment of national legaltaskforces in the two countries, which met regularly to work on abase draft agreement prepared by the MRC Navigation Programme.Several national and regional consultations and workshops wereheld to include the opinion of relevant stakeholders such as customs,immigration, river police, waterway departments, and the ministriesof environment and commerce.The Agreement Between the Royal Government of Cambodia andthe Government of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam on WaterwayTransportation was signed on 17 December 2009, and ratified byboth governments in January 2010. MRC is now supporting itsimplementation.A number of lessons were learned in this process. All agenciesthat will be affected by the agreement need to be involved, whichis necessary but costly and time-consuming. For proper implementationof the agreement, it is not only a requisite to include animplementation road map, but also to bind its milestones legally inthe agreement. Finally, it is clear that it is better to be patient andprovide the highest quality agreement than to rush into the formulationprocess, as the negotiations may fail if not prepared well.ChallengesHowever, there are also areas where cooperation has provedmore difficult – for example, the development of a tbEIA protocol.Beginning in 2001 the member countries began reviewingthe experiences of tbEIA globally, and the secretariat engaged anumber of experts to draft outlines for a tbEIA protocol for theMekong. The experience of the Espoo convention was used asthe most advanced system, but other examples werealso drawn upon. In order to provide a picture of therequirements from proponent and affected countries,a number of hypothetical case studies around actualprojects were undertaken.However, while the technical agencies could agreeon practical steps in identifying projects which mayrequire tbEIA, the required process, mechanisms toaddress additional costs and so on, the major hurdlewas on a legal and political level. From a legal point ofview the problems were twofold. First, for Thailand andViet Nam where the Mekong River Basin covers onlypart of their national territory, reconciling the requirementsof tbEIA in the basin with requirements outsideit and with non-MRC member countries (Malaysiaand Myanmar for Thailand and China for Viet Nam)would add complexity to the implementation. Second,national EIA legislation does cover all types of projects,whereas the MRC-supported tbEIA would focus onwater resources issues. Thus a tbEIA protocol wouldcover some types of impacts and not others, such asair pollution. The terminology used in the protocolremains a difficult issue and a balance is needed tospecify actions without contradicting national legislationrelated to EIA.What the future holdsAs the region develops, the water resources in the basinwill play an important role in the development of theLMB countries. This will inevitably result in potentiallyconflicting demands and requires additional efforts bythe member countries in finding the balance betweennational priorities, basin-wide considerations and therights of all riparian countries.MRC provides a practical framework for its membercountries to cooperate in the sustainable developmentof the basin’s resources. In some areas cooperation iseasier. Over the past 17 years the framework has developedinto a set of processes and strategies that allowsthe countries to discuss technical aspects of the developmentand management of the basin’s resources,which in turn underpins the political decisions madein the countries’ socioeconomic development plans.It is clear that the 1995 Mekong Agreement isworking, although there are high and differingexpectations from different stakeholders. MRC’s pastexperiences provide important lessons in how to moveforward and show the difficulties involved in balancingthe national priorities of sovereign countries withaims to cooperate in the basin’s development. Thecoming decade will without doubt further test MRC’sability to provide a framework for cooperation in theincreased use of shared resources.This article is the opinion of the author and does notnecessarily relflect the MRC Member Countries’ view onthe issues discussed. The author would like to acknowledgethe input from Ton Lennaerts, BDP and LievenGeerinck, NAP.[ 73 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTParticipation in the management of theNiger, Senegal and Congo river basinsChristophe Brachet and Daniel Valensuela, Deputy Secretaries, International Network of Basin OrganizationsThere are 276 transboundary rivers and lakes and morethan 300 aquifers shared by riparian countries aroundthe world. Transboundary basins cover 45 per cent ofthe world’s lands, linking two or more countries through waterresources located above and below the Earth’s surface. Manyof the world’s populations and ecosystems therefore dependon water resources crossing national borders. Emerging crisesrelated to population growth, climate change, urbanization,increasing demand for energy and food or regional instabilityaffect water resources management. The International Networkof Basin Organizations (INBO) appreciates how this situationbecomes more complex with transboundary waters.The willingness of states to cooperate regarding water managementmay derive from specific issues or common goals, regional orcommunity dynamics or a risk of conflict. Establishingtransboundary basin organizations broadly fosterscooperation. Whatever the structure model of the organization,it is advisable that mechanisms are planned topromote public and stakeholder participation andsupported by methods and means for consulting thepeople concerned. Such mechanisms are implemented bycountries and basin organizations of three major transboundaryrivers in Africa: the Niger, Senegal and Congo.The Niger Basin Authority (NBA), established in1964 by the nine states sharing the Niger River Basin(Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Ivory Coast,Guinea, Mali, Niger and Nigeria) led to a sharedvision process marked by the adoption in 2008 of anAction Plan for Sustainable Development and a WaterSchoolchildren around the Niger Basin model during the first regional forum of basin resources users[ 74 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTCharter. NBA’s major challenge is to accelerate and support thebuilding and coordinated management of large hydraulic structuresin the basin.The Organization for the Development of the Senegal River(OMVS) was created in 1972. It is an international institutionbased in Dakar which gathers Guinea Conakry, Mali, Mauritaniaand Senegal around common goals, including food self-sufficiencyfor the basin people, economic development of the member statesand preservation of the balance of ecosystems in the region. OMVShas adopted a Water Charter and is a globally rare example of jointownership of large dams.The International Commission of the Congo-Ubangi-SanghaBasin (CICOS), established in 1999, expanded its mission to integratedwater resource management (IWRM) in 2007, in addition toits original mandate focusing on the promotion of inland navigation.The CICOS member states (Cameroon, the Central AfricanRepublic, Congo, Gabon and the Democratic Republic of Congo)cover 83 per cent of the catchment area of the Congo River, thesecond largest river basin worldwide with 3,822,000 km².Among the stakeholders in basin management we can distinguishthe public sector (government administration, publicagencies, local communities and authorities) on the one hand andother stakeholders on the other: civil society (associations, nongovernmentalorganizations and water users), trade unions andprofessional organizations. Stakeholders in a transboundary basinbelong to different countries but share a common resource, landand heritage, including cultural. This sharing can be expressedthrough similar activities (agriculture, fishing, etc) or by a singlesensitivity to hazards and phenomena, whethernatural or not: drought and water scarcity, floods, dammanagement, pollution, invasive species and so on.The invitation, which was made by NBA to regionalorganizations and associations during a workshop gatheringthe nine basin countries in early 2005, has beenthe starting point of thinking about the participation ofcivil society in the shared vision process in the NigerRiver Basin. The identification of stakeholders andinterested parties was a prerequisite. Among non-statestakeholders we can distinguish groups, such as farmersor irrigators’ associations, from unorganized waterusers, which are the most numerous and often the ultimaterecipients of various development programmes.A study for the identification and characterizationof water users in the Niger River Basin wascarried out under the coordination of Eau Vive andthe International Secretariat for Water. Its outcomeswere presented at the first regional forum of basinresources users, held in February 2006 in Fada-Ngourma in Burkina Faso. For the first time, this stepallowed the congregation of civil society organizationson the basin scale to discuss issues of commoninterest with the states and partners. Several resolutionsof the NBA Council of Ministers eventually ledto the establishment of a regional coordination of theNiger Basin users, based on nine national coordinationprocesses.Images: © John Burton[ 75 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTOne major challenge, in terms of scale, of a large transboundaryriver basin like the Niger, Senegal and Congo lies in obtainingtrue stakeholder representation. The solution proposed in the NigerRiver Basin was to identify representatives per topic (agriculture,fisheries, water and sanitation, environment, hydropower and soon) while ensuring that each country is represented. The representatives’legitimacy must also be gained and a democratic process maybe initiated for stakeholder groups to choose their representatives.Cultural aspects can offer enabling conditions for participation.Another difficulty is the need to ascend and descend from thelocal to the international basin level, through the national level.These processes are facilitated when civil society participation isalready acquired in each IWRM (national process). The informationflowing up from local communities is then presented per country,with consolidation at the basin level.In Burkina Faso, the water agencies established in each nationalsub-basin apply the principles of integrated water resources managementand people’s participation. The Nakanbe Water Agency forinstance created local water committees. Their third annual forumwas held in December 2012 with the participation of the FrenchLoire-Brittany Water Agency, a partner of the Nakanbe agencyunder decentralized cooperation. In France, users’ participation hasbeen institutionalized and increased through the European WaterFramework Directive enacted in 2000.Transboundary basin organizations are likely to play a significantrole in the mechanisms for exchange with civil society on differentscales, which may require some changes in their organizationalculture. This ultimately means providing ‘seats’ to the people’srepresentatives in the institutional meetings of the basin organizationto achieve active participation (associated to decision making)and not a mere consultation.In the Niger River Basin, representatives of users’ regional coordinationregularly participate in various meetings of NBA bodies.Their representation has been formalized in some bodies such asthe Permanent Technical Committee, a new advisory body to theNBA Council of Ministers.The OMVS Master Plan for Water Development and Managementwas also drafted in a participatory manner. The assessmentvalidated in 2009, a true knowledge base shared between all stakeholders,is based on a rich bibliography of studies on the one handand, on the other, on meetings organized with the water stakeholdersin each country.The participatory approach implemented by OMVS has helped toinvolve people (often illiterate) in the drafting of the Master Plan, acomplex and technical document. An informative ‘image box’ guidefor people has been developed especially to facilitate the draftingand appropriation of the plan. Radio programmes have also beenused and strong support was provided by local facilitators trainedby the project team.The financial resources devoted to civil society participationshould be sufficient and can pass through basin organizations. As inthe Senegal River Basin, these organizations may provide technicalassistance and facilitation, especially for unorganized users, so thatstakeholders can familiarize themselves with issues through workshopsor specific media. The technical and financial partners canplay a catalytic role, as happened in the Niger River Basin throughFrench and Canadian cooperation, joined by German cooperationand the European Union. Continuity in supporting stakeholders’participation is also required.Climate change, transboundary watersand participationClimate change has already been affecting Africa fordecades. In the Sahel, there has been a reduction inrainfall and an increase in intra-seasonal and inter-annualvariability since 1970. In the Congo River Basin, the riverflow rates tend to decrease in the south and the north ofthe basin, leading to disruptions of navigation on the UbangiRiver among other things. The situation also generatesimpacts on groundwater, which are sometimes added to theoverexploitation of aquifers, as in the North-Eastern SaharaAquifer System.In this context, NBA, OMVS, CICOS and the Sahara and SahelObservatory have became members of the Global Network ofBasins engaged in a process of adaptation to climate change,a network established and jointly managed by INBO and theUnited Nations Economic Commission for Europe.Exchanges between the members of this network show thatto facilitate the preparation of climate change adaptationplans to be included in multi-annual basin managementplans, and to make effective their derived programmesof measures and action plans, they need to enable theparticipation of stakeholders through mechanisms to bedeveloped or invented.OMVS, for example, has established several consultativebodies to support this participation: the Standing WaterCommission, a body giving advice to the ministers ofthe member states; the Basin Committee; the NationalCoordinating Committees, an interface between national andregional levels; and Local Coordinating Committees establishedto be closer to users’ and stakeholders’ concerns and interests.The Congo River Basin approach started in 2012through a project funded by the European Union andimplemented by the International Office for Water(IOWater), Eau vive and Solidarité Eau Europe. Theactivities carried out in early 2013 with CICOS were:• meeting with and awareness-raising of thevarious partners• assessing the involvement of non-state stakeholdersin the past and future activities of the institution• drafting a list of the support to provide them• identifying the beneficiaries• assessing the feasibility, in time and in the CongoBasin, of participation in the development of theCICOS Master Plan.In all cases, the establishment of water informationsystems, organized in each riparian country and federatedat the large basin level, is a prerequisite to allow a truedialogue between stakeholders and create the conditionsfor genuine dialogue based on trust between partners.The International Network of Basin Organizations(INBO) has drafted a World Pact for Better BasinManagement which, on the basis of positive experiencesdeveloped worldwide, especially recommends“to organize a dialogue with stakeholders recognizedat basin level and ensure their active participation inorder to achieve a truly shared vision of the future, toidentify the necessary agreements on priorities and themeans to mobilize, to coordinate projects and initiatives,to analyse the results.”[ 76 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTThe Murray–Darling Basin Plan: cooperationin transboundary water managementKerryn Molloy, Senior Science Writer, Murray–Darling Basin AuthorityLate last year, Australia brought into law its first whole-ofbasinplan (the Basin Plan, 2012) for our most importantwater resource: the Murray–Darling Basin. This plansets limits on the quantities of water extraction for human(consumptive) use.Reaching this agreed limit for sustainable use of the basin’s waterresource is a world first for transboundary water management. Thebasin extends across borders and has important social and culturalvalues in addition to its national economic importance. Achieving widescalereform depended on agreed goals, overall stakeholder acceptanceand extensive cooperation between all levels of government.Map of the Murray–Darling Basin, showing contextwithin state boundariesSource: MDBAAbout the Murray–Darling BasinSpanning parts of four states and all of the AustralianCapital Territory, the basin contains Australia’s largestriver system, comprising the Murray and Darling riversand their tributaries. Ranked fifteenth in the world interms of length (3,780 km) and twentieth for area, thebasin extends across 14 per cent of Australia’s land mass(approximately equal to the area of France and Spaincombined). However, in the driest inhabited continenton Earth and with very low topography, these long, slowflowingrivers have high evaporation rates (around 94per cent of rainfall). The Murray–Darling system thereforecarries one of the world’s smallest volumes of waterfor its size. It is home to 2 million people (including 42Aboriginal nations) and directly supports another million.The basin’s approximately 60,000 agricultural businessesproduce around 40 per cent of Australia’s foodand fibre (estimated to be worth $A13 billion annually).Around a third of this is irrigation-assisted; andirrigation is the largest consumer of water in the basin.Important for tourism and recreation, about 30 percent of the basin’s land cover is native forest; and itcontains about 60,000 km 2 of floodplain and 30,000wetlands. Many of these are of national importance,and 16 are listed under the Ramsar Convention onWetlands of International Importance. There are at least95 threatened species dependent on basin ecosystems.Water resource development and managementSince the mid 1800s, water resource development hasgrown from initial pumping stations along the RiverMurray to support settlers and livestock, to the presentwhere we have more than 3,000 water regulation structures.The combined capacity of the major storages is about34,500 Gigalitres (GL). As a long-term average, 42 per centof the total surface water run-off to the Murray–DarlingBasin is diverted for consumption. In the connected riversystems, water is traded across and between catchments.In Australia’s climate, supporting the economicbase without overly compromising water-dependantecosystems is challenging. The Murray–DarlingBasin receives little direct rainfall and suffers periodicdrought - and droughts can last a decade. Inthe southern system, most rain falls across the upperreaches of the rivers in New South Wales and Victoria,and extraction by these states (particularly during[ 77 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTFirst steps towards wider cooperationDeveloping environmental consciousness has beenspurred by periodic droughts. For example, in the 1980sone such severe drought over the eastern half of thecontinent (initiating dust storms, water restrictions andhorrific fires) resulted in economic loss of around $A3billion. Accompanied by mounting evidence of decline,this episode instigated many inquiries, reports and calls foraction. Essentially, a shared understanding developed thatconsumption levels were more than the river system couldstand year-by-year; and there was a sufficiently compellingcase for wider cooperation for the greater good.As a more holistic view developed of the interconnectednessof all the water resources and the peopledependent upon them, the signatories to the thenMurray–Darling Basin Agreement began workingtowards more effective, coordinated and equitable plandrought)can result in limited flow to the floodplains of the lowerreaches and out of the Murray mouth in South Australia.Sufficient flow is vital as, in an average year, 2 million tonnes ofsalt leaches out of old soils and rocks and flows down the Murray–Darling. Without flushing flows salinity levels quickly build up,causing ecosystem damage, threatening agricultural production andreducing drinking water quality. Since the European development ofthe basin, flow has reduced by 75 per cent on average. The Murraymouth silts up and, during drought, remains open only by constantdredging of a narrow channel.In Australia’s federal system (whereby independent coloniesbecame states, which then joined to become the Commonwealthin 1901), water management has until very recently remained apower of the individual state/territory governments. While thesegovernments have cooperated to jointly manage the basin’s waterresource (through two key agreements: the River Murray WatersAgreement of 1914 and the Murray–Darling Basin Agreement of1987 and 1992), the primary focus has been on the fair distributionof water for consumption. States and the Commonwealth alsoworked together to construct dams, locks and weirs to secure watersupplies, prevent undesirable flooding and improve navigability.However, this river regulation and a quadrupling of surfacewater consumption between the 1930s and 1990s unintentionallyresulted in escalating environmental problems. Water storage andconsumption has disrupted the pattern of flow and prevents mostnaturally occurring small-to-medium-sized flood events. In thelower reaches of the system, many wetlands experience‘man-made droughts’ in over 60 per cent of years(compared to 5 per cent natural droughts pre-development).Consequently, there is a reduced area of healthywetland, frequent algal blooms and (without flow triggersfor spawning) declining native fish numbers. Theremoval of tree cover combined with irrigation led torising water tables, mobilizing yet more salt.Case study: environmental benefit from cooperative effortImage: Arthur Mostead, 2008The above image shows the Coorong during the millennium drought. The bright orange patches indicate the presence of iron sulphide. Ifleft undisturbed and covered with water, sulphidic sediments pose little threat. However, when exposed to oxygen, such as under droughtconditions, chemical reactions may lead to the generation of sulphuric acid. When this is wet again and released back into the rivers, itcauses substantial environmental damage and serious impacts on water supplies and human health[ 78 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTning. Indeed, the tagline for the new cooperative effort was: ‘Sixgovernments working in partnership with the community’.Functional institutions developed to underpin this (reflectingthe aim of political, bureaucratic and community-level cooperation).These were the Murray–Darling Basin Ministerial Council(political arm); the Murray–Darling Basin Commission (bureaucraticarm) and a Community Advisory Committee. In practice,while this cooperation produced many good initiatives includinga successful salinity and drainage strategy, improvements in algaemanagement and better water accounting, it did not prevent anoverall increase in water extraction as this was driven by nationaland global market forces.Another intense drought in 1991-95 reduced average ruralindustry production by around 10 per cent, despite diversionsactually increasing by about 8 per cent to support the northernbasin’s expanding cotton industry.With awareness that further increases could not be supported,this crisis created an opportunity to ‘make good’ on earlier commitments.This time, the Murray–Darling Basin Act 1993 gave legalforce to a new cross-jurisdictional, cooperative governance model.The Council of Australian Governments (COAG) formed to overseenational-level cooperation on issues of strategic importance andcross-jurisdictional concern, including the environment. COAG(consisting of the Prime Minister, State Premiers, Territory ChiefMinisters and the President of the Australian Local GovernmentAssociation) was underpinned by a Murray–Darling Basin MinisterialCouncil (MinCo) which had the responsibility of bringingthe Murray–Darling Basin Act to life.Cooperative reform to limit consumptionThe partnership embodied in MinCo initiated the first thoroughbasin-wide audit of water use, completed in 1995.Confirming that river health issues would become criticalif diversions increased (likely under the existing allocationsystem), the audit also predicted risks to long-term watersecurity for existing irrigators and critical human use. Thisprompted MinCo, after independent review, to institutethe first ever limit (the ‘Cap’) on consumptive water extraction.This was an important initial step towards findinga sustainable limit for extraction. However, it reflectedcapping at existing consumption levels rather than anythorough investigation. Indeed, despite Queenslandjoining the Murray–Darling Basin Agreement in 1996 andthe Australian Capital Territory in 1998 (meaning thatall basin governments were signatories for the first time),overall diversions actually continued to increase until1999 through the legacy of over-allocated entitlements towater and different state accounting systems.The National Water Initiative (2004) followed: ablueprint for reform towards addressing over-allocation,enhancing security of water access rights andremoving the remaining barriers to trade.A healthier Coorong (a TLM icon site) after rainfall and environmental water releases reconnected theLower Lakes with the seaImage: Denise Fowler, 2011From July 2012 to January 2013, around 1.2billion litres of stored environmental water wasreleased, coordinated to maximize outcomes andefficiency. Firstly, it improved instream healthalong the Murrumbidgee, Goulburn and Murrayrivers as flows moved downstream. Throughmobilizing carbon and reducing nutrient loadsand salinity, conditions improved for native fishand riverine vegetation. Secondly, a timed pulseof water (December 2012) acted as a triggerfor spawning and recruitment in large-bodiednative fish. Finally, on reaching the end of theRiver Murray system, flows were sufficient tobreach weirs, flush wetlands and improve theestuary (important for migratory fish movement).With increased food for wading birds in theRamsar-listed Coorong near the Murray Mouth,aerial waterbird surveys detected an increase inwaterbird diversity and increased breeding due toa marked increase in mudflat food sources andhabitat. The endangered southern bell frog hasalso been recorded in a number of wetlands.This complex delivery involved cross-jurisdictionalaccounting and the passage of large flowsthrough four river systems and across borders.Its achievement drew on many cooperativerelationships, with water contributed by theCommonwealth Environmental Water Holder,MDBA (through TLM), state governments andprivate donations. Its delivery was made possible byecological and technical experts working togetherwith water delivery partners (such as catchmentmanagement authorities) and river operatorsresponsible for controlling storage releases.This cooperative effort produced the largest evertargeted delivery for environmental benefit purposes.[ 79 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImplementing targeted recovery actionThe concept of ‘environmental water’ entered water policy considerationsin the early 2000s. Referring broadly to water used to improveor maintain the health of a river system – including dependentplants and animals – such water has timing, duration and volumeaspects. For example, a certain flow volume may be required overseveral weeks to support fish migration.In 2001, MinCo developed 15 objectives for a healthy workingRiver Murray and released a discussion paper which stimulatedextensive public comment from irrigators, residents, governments,scientists and traditional owners. The information generated informedthe establishment of The Living Murray (TLM) programme, managedby the Murray–Darling Basin Commission (which later became theMurray–Darling Basin Authority or MDBA). Encapsulating the powerof cooperative effort and the strength of community-wide participation,this jointly-funded partnership of the basin governments(excluding Queensland) and the Australian Government, set out forthe first time to recover 500 GL of additional flow in the river.Investing almost $A1 billion since 2004, TLM has fundedresearch, on-farm efficiencies (such as better irrigation systems)and improved infrastructure (for example, pipelining previouslyopen water channels), thus delivering real gains towards meetingour consumptive needs with less water. The recovered water hasbeen used for the restoration of six ‘icon’ sites on the River Murray– those jointly agreed as of the highest ecological value and culturalsignificance – as well as improving instream health. In addition,TLM has supported upgrades or installation of fishways to improvefish passage through dams and weirs, and has fostered many partnerships,including with and between indigenous nations in the basin.Stimulus for national coordinationDespite all the united effort to improve trade, efficiency and riverhealth, the worst drought on record (2000-2009) highlighted thecontinuing overall inequity between consumption and conservation.The effects resonated throughout the country as irrigated agriculturalproduction fell by an estimated 20 per cent with flow-on effectsto jobs. Tourism, recreation, cultural and spiritual practices wereimpacted as many rivers experienced flows almost 40 per cent belowprevious records; and flow to the Murray Mouth fell by up to 96 percent. An iconic and loved species, the river red gum tree portrayed agraphic illustration of a critically declining environment as it begandying over extensive areas.Widespread public debate raged about equitable management ofthe basin’s water resources. The Prime Minister ultimately recognizedthat for water resources to be managed holistically and forthe long-term, hard decisions must be taken that would affect largenumbers of people, requiring national governance. In 2007, at theheight of the drought, the Australian Government announcedmajor reform to deliver a basin-wide sustainable level of waterdiversion, supported by a $A10 billion package of initiatives.Products of national reformThis reform was enshrined in legislation (the Water Act 2007) andsupported by an Intergovernmental Agreement (2008), under whichstates referred sufficient powers to the Commonwealth to progressthe reform. The independent MDBA was charged with developing thebasin-wide strategic management plan (the Basin Plan).For the first time, a thoroughly investigated and considered limiton overall extraction from the basin’s surface and groundwater wasdetermined and, under this, regional planning levellimits were set. Known as the sustainable diversionlimits (SDLs), these were derived after first determiningan ‘environmentally-sustainable level of take’,representing the amount of water that must remain inthe system to support the health of key ecosystems andecosystem functions in the basin (10,870 GL). It wasdetermined using data from numerous scientific andeconomic studies, a 114-year climate record, a hydrologiccomputer modelling platform and a rigorous, peerreviewed process.Despite all existing cooperative mechanisms, achievingan enforceable limit wasn’t easy and negotiationstook four years. The main area of discord, which polarizedirrigators and environmentalists, was determiningwhat constituted ‘sustainable’ extraction. Other issuesincluded where and how the ‘environmental’ watershould be reclaimed (with states and regions concernedabout securing enough water for their industries) andwhether an upstream catchment should be responsiblefor the passage of volumes of water downstream tobenefit areas outside their jurisdiction.Factors critical to the work’s progress includedbipartisan support from Australia’s two major politicalparties and general high-level consensus on thecompelling need to achieve sustainability. A processthat gave all stakeholders a voice was vital, includingmechanisms for their views to influence the outcome.For this purpose, MDBA staff toured the basinseveral times conducting hundreds of consultationsessions, and then responded to thousands of submissions.MinCo met frequently, allowing jurisdictionalviews to be expressed and negotiating agreed policy.Updated scientific advice and data drove revisions tothe hydrologic modelling method, and together withwell-considered submissions led to several revisions ofthe draft Basin Plan.Ultimately, while the scientific analysis indicated theoverarching sustainable diversion limit, the final recoverydetermination (2,750 GL) reflected a balanceddecision that would deliver a ‘healthy, working basin’through optimizing the environmental, economic andsocial outcomes. With acceptance by sufficient stakeholders,the Basin Plan became law in 2012, with atransition period before SDLs are enforceable in 2019.On-ground outcomesEnvironmental water recovery is occurring throughthe Commonwealth government’s $A12.9 billionWater for the Future initiative. Water savings accruedfrom infrastructure works and modernization projectsand direct purchasing of water rights (from volunteersellers at market price) are held by a statutory ‘waterholder’. This body delivers the environmental waterconsistent with the Basin Plan. Through such initiatives,together with earlier water recovery such asTLM, over 3,500 GL (about 20-25 per cent of historicalconsumptive water use) has already been made availablefor targeted purposeful environmental watering.[ 80 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTMankind on the shores of the Baikal:the transboundary ecosystem ofRussia and MongoliaE. I. Lishtovannii and A. N. Matveev, Irkutsk State University, Russia; B. Bayartogtokh,Mongolian State University; and T. Villemin, University of Savoie, FranceLake Baikal, located in South-Eastern Siberia, is one ofthe most unique lakes in the world. It was formed 25-30million years ago and corresponds to a rift valley that isalmost subsiding today. The lake contains about 20 per cent ofthe world’s surface freshwater supply and its transparency isstriking up to 40 metres deep. It is a place of biological waterflora and fauna diversity on a global scale. At present, more than2,630 species and varieties of plants and animals are knownto science, two thirds of which are endemic. 1 The number ofknown Baikal organisms is continuously growing, as revealedby research done by Russian and other scientists.Lake Baikal was inscribed on the United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) World HeritageList in 1996. In 2008, the Russian Government announced that thelake is one of the seven wonders of Russia.Lake Baikal contains about 20 per cent of the world’s surface freshwater supply and2,630 plant and animal varietiesImage: Evgeni KozyrevThe largest tributary of Lake Baikal is the Selengariver, which springs in Mongolia and brings morethan 60 per cent of the water influx to the lake. TheSelenga river basin is a transnational mega-ecosystem,the largest water basin of Mongolia and the Republic ofBuryatia region of the Russian Federation. The Selengabasin comprises more than 80 per cent of the Baikalbasin, indicating the significant role of Mongolia in thelong-term ecological health of the lake.The Selenga, flowing into Lake Baikal, forms theworld’s largest freshwater delta occupying an area of 680km². This delta was included in the Ramsar Conventionlist of Wetlands of International Importance in 1996 –a decision explained by the river’s abundance of floraand fauna, as well as its considerable role in the purificationof polluted Selenga waters coming into the lake.The drainage basin of the Selenga river is 447,060 km 2 ,with a length of 1,024 km (including the headwaters ofthe Ider River which are 1,476 km long). The length ofthe river in Russia is 409 km. The river basin is directlyaffected by industrial and agricultural sites located inMongolia and in the Republic of Buryatia, and indirectlyaffected through the air by industrial sites of the Irkutskregion. Surface pollution, caused by precipitation andanthropogenic sources, directly influences all elements ofthe Selenga ecosystem and gradually percolates throughunderground layers. There is a more intense migrationof toxic components through these structures. Linearlyelongated centres of underground toxic water pollutionare formed in the area and might enter the Selenga as wellas the Baikal water system. In such a situation, the deltaplays a significant role in Selenga river self-purificationprocesses. The delta is a massive wetland area, whichundergoes intensive processes of binding and sedimentationof river-driven organic matter and pollutants.In the Selenga delta area, the most apparent changesin the lake water level result from the natural andanthropogenic processes connected with the IrkutskHydroelectric Power Station. The dam was constructedin the late 1950s on the Baikal’s outlet, the AngaraRiver, 60 km from the place where the Angara flowsout of the lake. Seismic, tectonic and other endogenous[ 81 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTThe nature of the Baikal was held sacred by local people and there are manymonuments in the regionphenomena, characterizing contemporary geological activity, arethe most apparent in this area. The main threats to the Baikal andSelenga basins are climate change, industrial development, increasingpollutants, destruction of habitat, reduction of biodiversity, andinflux and adaptation of alien species.The length of the border between the Russian Federation andMongolia is 3,488 km. In Mongolia, 25 rivers flow in to the Selengaand the main part of the Selenga river basin lies on the frontier withRussia. This part of Mongolia, called the Han-hai, is the core of thecountry’s economy. It plays an important role in addressing socialdevelopment issues and has great potential for economic growth andfavourable conditions for living.The total area of the region is 343.2 km 2 , or 20 per cent of theoverall Mongolian territory. It includes 122 districts (somons) andeight provinces (aimaks) partially or fully. The average populationdensity of Mongolia is 1.8 people per square kilometre; but along theSelenga river basin, it is 4.4 people per square kilometre. In 2011, theoverall population of the Selenga river basin was 2.1 million people,representing 73.6 per cent of the total population of Mongolia. Thenumber of city residents of the region has notably increased.Major industrial cities of the country are located on the shoresof the Selenga tributaries. The largest industries are located inUlaanbaatar, Erdenet and Darkhan. These include the Erdenet, Gobiand Darkhan metallurgical companies, carpet and cashmere woolcompanies, lambskin coat factories and meat processing and packingplants. Such a concentration of people and economic resources leadsto an intensified anthropogenic impact and ecological problems.It is clear that the Selenga river plays an important role in formingthe hydrological, hydrochemical and hydrobiological regimen ofLake Baikal. Its delta is a natural biofilter and indicator of the lake’scondition, and this necessitates a complex scientific assessment ofImage: Evgeni Kozyrevthe condition of its ecosystem. Nonetheless, preservationof the lake is impossible without the joint effortsof both Russia and Mongolia. There is a clear need forjoint support and activities aimed at the preservationof biodiversity and the health of water and land ecosystemsto ensure that the systems can sustain requiredfunctions for future generations.Before detailing current mutual efforts to preservethis valuable resource, it is important to clarify howpast generations of people who have lived in the Baikalregion have perceived the sanctity of the lake andpreserved the natural objects that surround it.Ecological traditions of the Baikal region’s aboriginalpeople developed over time and had their own history.The nature of the Baikal was always acknowledgedin the Central Asian world. For example, accordingto Genghis Khan’s edict, the area around Lake Baikalwas proclaimed a reserve. Any activity causing harmto nature and the gods was outlawed. A prohibition listwas created, which was in essence an ecological codeof that time. Siberian people attributed a soul to nature.They had practiced careful treatment of the Baikal andits adjacent territories for centuries. Developing theidea of man’s reliance on natural powers, indigenouspeople and Russian newcomers deemed that anydisease, including any accidental and minor ailment,was nothing but punishment from the local spirits whoprotected the Baikal. People, in their turn, longed forthe Baikal’s protection, using adjacent unique naturalobjects such as minerals, springs and therapeutic mud.The indigenous populations of the Baikal region adaptedtheir households to the local natural conditions.Humans developed a special attitude towards objectsof a colossal scale that engendered a terrifying superstition.Such objects were seen as sacred, and myths werecreated around them. Lake Baikal is a huge water reservoir,surrounded by high mountain ridges on almostall sides. Therefore, the myths created by people whoinhabited the pre-Baikal area in ancient times werefocused on the spiritualization of water and mountains;a feature that is especially notable in Buryat myths. Thisidea can be traced in a series of cosmogonic myths. Inall cases the action takes place on Lake Baikal or in itswaters. In this regard, water is seen as an original, creativeelement and a medium of conception and creation.Mountains are inseparable from water in myths, andthe two are merged into a twofold invigorating source.It was quite natural that the heroes of ancient Buryatmyths asked their ‘parents’ (the elements that createdthem) for protection and salvation. They formed anoriginal unanimity of water and mountainous powers,which was reflected in the process of giving names tonatural objects. With the development of shamanism,which arose in the ancient historical epochs, human lifewas related to water which, being valued as a sourceof life, was saturated with greater sacral diversity.‘Khaty’ or water spirits appeared, living near the lakeand a concept of ‘water tsars’ was formed. These had acelestial origin and were light and virtuous. There is a[ 82 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: Evgeni KozyrevRecognizing human beings as part of the ecosystem is a key component of natural resources managementrelatively large number of water tsars, as well as masters of mountainpeaks, and all their names are unknown. However, accordingto some ethnological data, a considerable number of names reflectthe physical properties of water.Notably, shaman categories and concepts formed by natives livingnear the lake further intensified the parameters for perceiving thesurrounding space. The creation of myths by Siberian indigenouspeoples and their shamanistic culture as a whole prove the currentopinion of scientists on the joint process of developing the areaaround Lake Baikal. When Russians came to the area, the spiritualpart of the lake’s perception did not change but was transformed tosome extent. In Siberian Russian-speaking folklore stories, legends,and songs, Baikal, called the ‘Holy Sea’, is presented as an epic hero,personifying the beauty and strength of Siberia.Hence, nature plays an important role both in Mongolian andRussian cultures and a traditional way of life is built on great respectfor the environment. Until recently, there was a taboo against livingon the shores of the Holy Sea. In the Republic of Butyatia thereare 111 water monuments, including three glaciers, 61 springs, tworivers, 33 lakes and 12 waterfalls. A 5.7 million km 2 area of LakeBaikal’s basin in Mongolia (18.9 per cent of the overall protected areain the country) has ‘protected’ status. The Mongolian Governmenttook the responsibility of enlarging the network of protected sites onLake Baikal and included a few more in 2011. At present, there arefive specially protected nature sites, 10 national parks, four naturereserves and four monuments of natural and historicalheritage along the Selenga in Mongolia. 2In the twentieth century, the Russian and Mongoliangovernments concluded a number of transboundaryagreements aimed at the preservation of natural resourcesfor people living around the Baikal region. In 1995,the bilateral agreement ‘On Conservation and Use ofTansboundary Water Resources’ was signed. Prior to this,agreements signed in 1974 and 1988 were enforced. In2000, an agreement between the Academy of Sciences ofMongolia (ASM) and the Russian Academy of Sciences(RAS) on scientific cooperation was signed. Within theframework of the agreement, the Mongolian water ecosystemstudy programme was adopted. In July 2001, the 4thMeeting of the Authorized Representatives of the Russianand Mongolian Governments in Ulan-Bator approved aprogramme of joint ichthyologic research on fish reservesin the Selenga river within Mongolia and Buryatia.Mongolia and Russia exchange information on aregular basis. In 2006, joint planning of water basinmanagement was discussed. In 2008, a broadenedlist of pollutants was made, with agreement that thedumping of pollutants should be controlled by bothparties. In 2011, a meeting was held in line with theagreement ‘On Conservation and Use of Tansboundary[ 83 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTNatural resource management should acknowledge that water systems fulfilecosystem functions key to environment sustainability and human well-beingWater Resources’, at which a final protocol on bilateral collaborationwas signed. In 2012, a special ministry of internationalcollaboration on the problems of water resources was created inMongolia and three important laws were enacted regarding theuse of water from these resources. Altogether, there are 56 lawsin Mongolia dealing with the protection of the environment andmanagement of water resources.One of the ways to preserve Lake Baikal is to restore traditionalforms of management run by local people. Under market conditions,these forms will definitely ensure employment and improve people’sstandards of living. The forms are suitable to the highest degreefor preserving ecosystems in and around Lake Baikal as a worldnatural heritage site. They will facilitate the region’s sustainabledevelopment; its support of biodiversity; its production of ecologicallyclean, high quality agricultural products; its implementation ofautonomous low-energy technologies and small-sized technologicalmeans; and its tourism development. The consent of both Russiaand Mongolia is in place to execute a comprehensive and unifiedprogramme in this direction, and this is key to the continuation ofresearch and nature conservation activities.The rational management of natural resources such as water mustbe directed to ensure that the consumption and use of this resource donot exceed the environment’s assimilating capacity. Natural resourcemanagement should be based on the idea that water systems do nothave an economic value only, but also fulfil ecosystem functions thatImage: Evgeni Kozyrevare of key importance for environment sustainability andhuman well-being.The ecosystem approaches to management containthe following key components:• combining ecological, social and economic goals• recognizing human beings as part of the ecosystem• including a scientifically justified understanding ofhow ecosystems react to natural ecological processesand anthropogenic interferences.UNESCO international chairs undertake similarprojects, among them the Irkutsk State University Chairon water resources, co-managed with Savoie University.The university has a wide spectrum of science partnersin Buryatia as well as neighbouring Mongolia, andcontinues to involve miscellaneous interest groups injoint processes to define issues and search for solutionswithin a University Twinning and NetworkingProgramme network. Comparison with alpine lakes likethe Leman Lake, another Swiss-French transnationallake along the Rhône valley, has also been undertaken.There are many additional examples of transnationallakes along the alpine chain, such as Lake Major in Italy,Lake Balaton in Hungary and the Bodensee in Germany,while Austria and Switzerland also have drainage basinscovering more than one country.Joint research projects performed during comprehensiveexpeditions of the Irkutsk and Mongolian State universitiesto Lake Khövsgöl and the Selenga basin (1959-1960and 1969-1992) and joint Russian-Mongolian comprehensivebiological expeditions of RAS and ASM (1970 topresent day) are prime examples of joint study and preservationsolutions in Lake Baikal and its largest tributary,the Selenga river. As a result of conducted studies, criteriaand middle-scale cartography methods were developed forecological-biological and ecological-economic assessmentsof ecosystem and natural resource conditions. Throughoutthe expedition time, more than 20 monographs and 1,000articles have been published, and about 50 doctoral and100 PhD dissertations have been defended.The latest steps in this direction include the formationof the Russian-Mongolian interdisciplinary expeditionof the Siberian branch of RAS and ASM (2012) and aninternational project, ‘Transboundary Diagnostic Analysisof Baikal Lake Basin’ (2012-2014). This project is a jointeffort by Russian and Mongolian scientists with supportfrom international organizations such as the UnitedNations Office for Project Services. The UNESCO waterresource chair at Irkutsk State University took an activepart in the project, carrying out studies on ‘Issues Relatedto Habitat and Health of Benthos in the Selenga RiverDelta’. The studies revealed new data on quantitative andqualitative indicators of zoo benthos of the Selenga riverdelta in the summer and autumn seasons. The first soilatlas was drawn; initial information about composition,quantitative characteristics and detritus and solid wasteshore accumulation mechanics was obtained; the nutritionhabits of primary delta benthos fish were studied in detail;and their impact on zoo benthos organisms was assessed.[ 84 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTLibya’s experience in the management oftransboundary aquifersOmar Salem, Senior Hydrogeologist, General Water Authority – Ministry of Water Resources, LibyaLibya shares several aquifer systems with neighbouring countries.The North-Western Sahara Aquifer System (NWSAS)is shared with Algeria and Tunisia, the Nubian SandstoneAquifer System (NSAS) with Egypt, Sudan and Chad, the GefaraAquifer with Tunisia, and the Murzuk Aquifer System with Algeriaand Niger. About 85 per cent of the present water supply of Libyaoriginates from transboundary aquifer systems. This ratio varies inneighbouring countries according to the prevailing local conditions.Given their paramount importance in providing water needed forsecuring national and regional economic development, and theirsusceptibility to long-term adverse effects, the NSAS and NWSASwere singled out by the riparian states for additional studies. Thesewould ultimately lead to coordinated joint management throughmultilateral cooperation mechanisms under the auspices of specializedinternational organizations.The NSAS includes the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic aquifers in the southand the Neogene aquifers in the north. It extends over a surface area ofmore than 2.2 million km 2 in Libya, Egypt, Sudan and Chad. In Libya,it is known as the Kufra and Sarir basins, and forms the main supply oflocal water requirements for domestic and irrigation use in addition towater supply for oil production activities and, more recently, as a sourcefor the Man-made River Project. Water exploitation from the NSAS issteadily increasing in Egypt, but is still modest in Sudan and Chad.About 85 per cent of Libya’s water supply originates fromtransboundary aquifer systemsSource: GWA LibyaOn the other hand, the NWSAS extends over asurface area of over 1 million km 2 in Libya, Algeriaand Tunisia. In Libya, it is known as the Hamada alHamra Basin and is subdivided into two sub-basins:the Ghadames in the west and the Sawf al Jin in theeast. It terminates at the sabkha of Tawurgha alongthe Mediterranean.The NWSAS contains two main groundwater aquifers:the Upper Jurassic-Lower Cretaceous sandstone,known regionally as the Continental Intercalaire andlocally as the Kikla aquifer; and the Upper Cretaceouslimestone known regionally as the Complex Terminaland locally as the Nalut and Mizda aquifers.Since the early 1970s, water authorities in theconcerned countries have launched bilateral and multilateraldialogues leading to mutual agreements to launchsystematic programmes for joint monitoring and assessmentof their transboundary groundwater resources.These later expedited the establishment of permanentjoint institutions, namely the Joint Commissionfor the Study and Development of the NSAS and theConsultation Mechanism for the NWSAS.Joint Commission for the NSASThe Joint Commission for the NSAS was establishedin Tripoli in 1989 between Libya and Egypt, andwas joined at a later stage by Sudan and Chad. It wasentrusted with the following tasks:• collection, analysis, integration and disseminationof data• conducting complementary hydrogeological studies• planning for the development of water resourcesaccording to agreed exploitation policies at nationaland regional levels• managing the aquifer on sound scientific bases• conducting capacity building programmes• ensuring rational use of the NSAS water• assessing the environmental impact of waterdevelopment• organizing workshops and consolidating tieswith corresponding regional and internationalorganizations.During the past two decades the commission, incollaboration with international organizations, hassucceeded in implementing several projects.[ 85 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTRegional strategy for the utilization of the NSASThe NSAS Regional Strategy project, launched in 1998, wasfinanced in its first phase by the International Fund for AgriculturalDevelopment (IFAD) and executed by the Centre for Environmentand Development for the Arab Region and Europe. The project aimsat reviewing previous studies, preparing a regional hydrogeologicalstudy, establishing a common data base and preparing a mathematicalmodel to simulate future aquifer behaviour in responseto national development schemes. A second phase of the projectcovered the socioeconomic component and was financed by theIslamic Development Bank.The NSAS ProjectThe project was launched in 2005 by the International AtomicEnergy Agency and the Global Environment Facility as executingagencies and the United Nations Development Programme as theimplementation agency. The long-term goal of the project was torealize a rational and equitable management of the NSAS for sustainablesocioeconomic development and the protection of biodiversityand land resources. The immediate objectives are to strengthenand consolidate the management consultation mechanism betweenthe four countries; to expand, update and consolidate the commondatabase and mathematical model; and to create an enabling environmentto secure sustainable management of the NSAS.Consultation Mechanism for the NWSASLikewise, cooperation between Libya, Algeria and Tunisia in managingshared aquifers dates back to the mid 1970s in the form ofbilateral and trilateral committees for the exchange of hydrogeologicalinformation and the coordination of planned developmentactivities. This collaboration resulted in the creation of a permanentConsultation Mechanism for the NWSAS. Key achievements includethe implementation of the two phases of the NWSAS project.The NWSAS Project – Phase 1Phase 1 of the NWSAS project started in July 1999 and was initiallyfinanced by the International Fund for Agricultural Development.Coordinated joint management of Libya’s shared aquifer systems is achieved throughmultilateral cooperation mechanismsImage: GWA LibyaThe project succeeded in defining the technical parametersof the aquifer system and in building a commongeographic information system controlled data base.A mathematical model to simulate aquifer response tofuture development schemes was developed for lateruse by the water authorities in the three countries as avaluable management tool.At the end of this phase, the three countries signed anagreement to establish a consultation mechanism to behosted by the Sahara and Sahel Observatory in Tunisiaand financially supported by the member countries.A Coordination Unit was appointed in 2002 and wascommissioned to carry out the following tasks:• manage and update the data base and thesimulation model• develop and monitor a reference observation network• process, analyse and validate data• develop databases on socioeconomic activitiesrelated to water use• develop and publish indicators on the use ofwater resources• promote and facilitate the conduct of joint studiesand research• formulate and implement training programmes• update the NWSAS model periodically.The NWSAS Project – Phase 2Under phase 2, complementary studies covering relatedhydrogeological components were conducted. Thesewere studies of the Libyan-Tunisian Gefara Plain aquifersystem; the Algerian and Tunisian Shotts; the WesternErg in Algeria; and a socioeconomic study.The NSAS Joint Commission and the NWSASConsultation Mechanism represent a step on the righttrack for the sound management of transboundaryaquifers in the region. However, more efforts shouldbe devoted to strengthening the technical capacityof the competent institutions with special focuson governance, transparency and legislation. Futureinitiatives will primarily focus on securing politicaland financial support; periodical updating of databasesand models; and harmonizing legislation and policies.A regional centreIn recognition of the importance of sound managementof shared aquifers, Libya has requested the InternationalHydrological Programme (IHP) council to establish aregional centre under the auspices of the United NationsEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO). This will be devoted to the management ofshared aquifer resources in Africa and the Arab region,with the aim of providing training facilities to Africanexperts and organizing seminars and meetings to facilitatethe dissemination of knowledge among Africancountries. During its fifteenth session in June 2002, theIntergovernmental Council of IHP adopted resolutionXV-10 welcoming the establishment of the centre. Anagreement for the establishment of the centre was signedin Tripoli by the Director-General of UNESCO and the[ 86 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTSecretary of Agriculture of Libya in 2007. The centre assumed itsduties in 2008 in Tripoli after the ratification of the agreement by theLibyan authorities.Key objectives were defined for the centre. It aims to generate andprovide scientific and technical information and support the exchangeof information on shared groundwater management issues, withemphasis on Africa and the Arab states. It will promote cooperationon multidisciplinary research and the compilation of case studies onshared groundwater management in the region involving internationalinstitutions and networks, especially those under the UNESCO/IHPand World Meteorological Organization auspices. It will undertakecapacity building on integrated water and agriculture managementwithin the African region at institutional, professional and educationallevels, including awareness raising activities to the general public andto specific targeted audiences. In addition to seeking and responding toinvitations for cooperation with international institutions and centres, itwill advance methodology in the field of shared groundwater management,support and cooperation with the IHP Internationally SharedAquifer Resources Management (ISARM) project.Capacity building on integrated water and agriculture management is one objectiveof the UNESCO IHP regional centreImage: GWA LibyaAddressing transboundary aquifer issuesDuring the past three decades and in coordination with relevant internationalorganizations, particularly UNESCO, Libya has hosted anumber of technical and political conferences of paramount importancein addressing transboundary aquifer issues in Africa and the world.Apart from active participation in international and regional eventson groundwater management in general and transboundary aquifersin particular, the Libyan IHP national committee, in coordinationwith UNESCO, organized three international conferences. The firstwas the International Conference on Regional Aquifer Systems inArid Zones – Managing Non-renewable Resources, held in Tripoli inNovember 1999. The conference marked a milestone in the discussionof the emerging concept of regional aquifers and provided a generalunderstanding of non-renewable groundwater resources. It was alsoinstrumental in launching the UNESCO ISARM initiative.The other two main events are the International Conferences onManaging Shared Aquifer Resources in Africa, held in Tripoli in June2002 and May 2008. These conferences focused more specifically onthe technical components of transboundary aquifers in Africa andsucceeded in providing sound scientific data. They have also contributedto the creation of networks of experts who, overthe years, have continued to engage with the realizationof rational management and sustainable developmentissues of transboundary aquifers in the continent. Theysucceeded in providing a suitable atmosphere for Africanand international experts to debate issues related toshared aquifers in the region, and formed a platformto highlight and discuss the activities of the UNESCOISARM initiative in Africa with emphasis on expandingthe existing network of experts and making proposalsfor new subregional activities. The technical sessionsreviewed experiences on existing scientific knowledge,leading to the establishment of a plan of action for sharedaquifer resources management in Africa.At the political level and in collaboration with theAfrican Union, Food and Agriculture Organization anda number of competent organizations, Libya managedto organize two major events, namely the ExtraordinarySummit of the African General Assembly of the Headsof State and Government on Agriculture and Water(Sirte, 2004) and the High Level Conference on Waterfor Agriculture and Energy in Africa – The Challengesof Climate Change (Sirte, 2008). Item six of the SirteDeclaration of the African Union extraordinary summiturged member states to “encourage bilateral agreementon shared water management.”Management of shared aquifers faces major challenges,with serious implications for the progress of hydrogeologicalstudies and data collection campaigns as a resultof their wide geographical spread under barren desertconditions. For economic and technical reasons, the bulkof extracted water originates from shallow and intermediateaquifers and rarely from deeper horizons. Thisraises the degree of uncertainty in mathematical models.Nevertheless, geological, geophysical and hydrogeologicaldata generated by oil exploration activities are invaluablein filling gaps while conducting regional studies. Otherchallenges that still need to be properly addressed includethe lack of necessary funds needed to carry out specialtechnical tasks and provide training for competent individuals.An equally important challenge is the lack of abinding legal framework. National legislation often definespriorities for water use in view of available alternatives.In Libya as in some other countries, for example, waterscarcity led to the justification of groundwater mining asa transitory solution to close the gap between supply anddemand, a matter that needs to be properly addressed bythe joint consultation mechanisms.Libya has acquired broad experience in the managementof shared aquifer systems through a long history ofclose and transparent collaboration with neighbouringcountries. This culminated in the establishment of jointinstitutions focusing on the exchange of information,conducting regional studies and planning for rationalexploitation of the resource. Libya is looking forward tothe enactment of an international law that supersedesnational legislation with regard to transboundary aquifersand governs the equitable use and protection of the sharedresources to achieve sustainable development for all.[ 87 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTTransboundary groundwater resourcesmanagement implemented in theKumamoto region of JapanTadashi Tanaka, Department of International Affairs, University of Tsukuba, JapanThe Transboundary Groundwater Resources Managementsystem is a typical groundwater management systemimplemented in the Kumamoto region of Japan. Thesystem was introduced in 2004 and, in cooperation with neighbouringmunicipalities, the Kumamoto City government hascreated a unique funding system to encourage artificial groundwaterrecharge projects through abandoned rice paddy fieldsin neighbouring towns outside the city boundary. These willenable sustainable use and management of regional groundwaterresources and the passing down of this precious resourceto future generations. The groundwater management system isregulated by the Kumamoto City, local governments and the citypeople. It provides a good example for assessing and managingaquifer systems crossing regional administrative boundarieswithin a given country, as well as of a typical self-governancesystem for managing regional groundwater resources.In addition to aquifers that continental countries share with othercountries, there are aquifers crossing regional administrative boundarieswithin a given country. These aquifers are distributed in differentparts of Japan which have diverse regulations and social conditions.Transboundary aquifer crossing 13 local governments inthe Kumamoto regionSource: T. TanakaThe monitoring and management of such aquifers needat least the same amount attention as those of transboundaryaquifers between national boundaries.There is currently no unified national law in Japan tomanage groundwater resources except for preservationof the land against subsidence. Therefore, the right ofgroundwater resources belongs to the landowners.Two groundwater laws, the Industrial Water Lawintroduced in 1956 and the Law on Regulating theExtraction of Groundwater for Use in Buildings introducedin 1962, are effective across Japan, but practicalapplication of these laws to a specific area has beendecided by local government. For example, the TokyoMetropolitan Government has succeeded in reducingthe rate of land subsidence by converting waterresources for industrial use from groundwater tosurface water, and by providing legislative guidanceto save groundwater resources in factories and buildingsdepending on these two laws. However, borderingprefectures are still suffering from land subsidence.Besides preservation of the land against subsidence,however, a new concept is now growingamong Japanese municipalities, communities andcitizens. They see groundwater as a shared naturalresource that needs to be managed on that basis.One typical groundwater management system is theTransboundary Groundwater Resources Managementsystem implemented in the Kumamoto region ofJapan. The artificial groundwater recharge projectproposed by this system, using abandoned rice paddyfields, is considered an excellent example of groundwatermanagement in Japan.The vast groundwater reservoir and regionalgroundwater flow system cover 13 local governmentsincluding Kumamoto City, with an area of around1,040 km 2 and 1 million residents. All the water forthe city’s residents is supplied from these abundant,pure and crystal-clean groundwater resources. Most ofthe region is covered by pyroclastic deposits created bythe four major eruptions of Mount Aso between 0.26Ma and 0.09 Ma. There are two main aquifer systems,namely the unconfined aquifer (No. 1 aquifer) and theconfined aquifer (No. 2 aquifer). The No. 2 aquifer[ 88 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTAnnual change of groundwater level in the observation well at Kikuyo3050004000Groundwater level altitude (m)201030002000Annual rainfall (mm)100001982 1988 1994 2000 2006Annual rainfall Monthly average level Trend0Source: T. Tanakastores major groundwater resources in the Kumamoto region andis developed for water resources as a huge groundwater reservoirwhich has relatively high local precipitation of around 2,200 mmper year and highly permeable pyroclastic deposits.In a geologically unique area called the groundwater pool, a lacustrinedeposit layer separating the two aquifers allows rainwater andirrigation water to recharge directly into the No. 2 aquifer system. 1The groundwater recharged in this area flows toward to the southwest,flowing out into the lake of Ezu and many other locations inKumamoto City. The groundwater supplies 100 per cent of the waterfor the 670,000 residents of Kumamoto City, which is a prefecturalgovernment. In this regard, the No. 2 aquifer in the Kumamotoregion is a transboundary aquifer crossing regional administrativeboundaries. This is a typical feature in transboundary aquifer distributionobserved in many other Japanese provinces.Kumamoto City started to measure groundwater levels in the1980s through a network of observation wells. In the 25 yearsbetween 1982 and 2006, the groundwater level declined 4.4 m,an average decline of 0.18 m/year. This trend of groundwaterlevel decline is also observed in the other 12 observation wellslocated in the upland area of the region. 2 The discharge of springwater in the representative spring lake of Ezu has also diminishedby approximately 15 per cent during the last 15 years from450,000 m 3 /day to 380,000 m 3 /day. In the 1950s, it was approximately1 million m 3 /day. 3 On the other hand, total withdrawalsof groundwater in the region have been reduced, mainly due toa considerable decrease in groundwater extraction for industrialand agricultural uses. The amount of city water supplied is almostconstant, and now accounts for more than 60 per cent of totalgroundwater consumption. 4 These facts indicate that the region’sgroundwater resources have decreased due to a fallinggroundwater recharge rate in the Kumamoto region.The major reason for this decreasing groundwaterrecharge rate is considered to be land use change inthe past 30 years due to rapid urbanization.In the Kumamoto region, sources of groundwaterrecharge to the reservoir are mainly attributed to thesurrounding mountain regions, forests, grasslands andpaddy fields. Among them, the groundwater rechargerate from the paddy fields is estimated at about 46per cent annually. 5 Therefore, the most effectivemeasure to increase groundwater in the region is touse the paddy fields through collaboration with localfarmers. In this regard, the Kumamoto Prefecture andKumamoto City have created a unique funding systemto encourage artificial groundwater recharge projectsthrough abandoned paddy fields in neighbouringtowns outside Kumamoto City, for the sustainable useand management of regional groundwater resourcesand the preservation of this precious resource forfuture generations.A Conference on Utilizing Rice Paddies forGroundwater Recharge consisting of the KumamotoPrefecture, Kumamoto City, two relevant localgovernments, four land improving districts and JapanAgricultural Cooperatives (JA) was established in2004 to promote the funding system for implementingthe artificial groundwater recharge project throughthe abandoned rice paddy fields. This groundwatermanagement system is regulated by the Kumamoto[ 89 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTConference on Utilizing Rice Paddies for GroundwaterRecharge in the Kumamoto regionKumamotoCityDischargeSource: T. TanakaConference on Utilizing Rice Paddiesfor Groundwater Recharge(Consisting of Kumamoto Pref.,Kumamoto City, relevant two localgovernments, four local land improvingdistricts and JA)FinancialsupportMake anapplicationand reportConf. on Proc Agricul.of Water Cycle Type(Relevant two localgovernments, four localland improvingdistricts and JA)Proceeding and adjustmentof the projectFinancialsupportMake anapplicationEffective recharge to groundwater reservoirCorporativefarmersRechargeCity, two local governments and the large groundwaterusers in the city areas to support the funding system.Each year the Kumamoto Prefecture, Kumamoto Cityand two local governments together with JA discussdevelopment initiatives and the preservation ofgroundwater resources in the region. During the sixyears 2004-2009 6 the system increased the rechargedarea of abandoned paddy fields from 255 hectares permonth to around 550 hectares per month, while estimatedgroundwater recharge amounts increased from8.73 million m 3 /year to 16.77 million m 3 /year. As aresult, the spring discharge rate in Lake Ezu, which islocated in the discharge area of the groundwater flowsystem in the Kumamoto region, has recovered to alevel of around 12 years before.Accepting those fruitful effects of the system forgroundwater recharge, the Kumamoto Prefecture and13 local governments made a long-term groundwatermanagement plan in 2008, for which the target yearis 2024. According to a report by Kumamoto City, thetarget groundwater recharge amount in 2024 has beenset at 73 million m 3 /year, with reduced groundwaterwithdrawals set at 16 million m 3 /year. This targetgroundwater recharge amount for the KumamotoArtificial groundwater recharge through an abandoned rice paddy field (left: before flooding, right: after flooding)[ 90 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTregion corresponds to four times larger than that of the actual resultsduring the six years from 2004 to 2009.The project has been awarded the 2013 UN-Water ‘Water forLife’ Best Practices award in the Best Water Management Practicecategory. The achieved system for creating groundwater in theKumamoto region has been evaluated as the combined work of thenatural system of Mount Aso and ‘local human activity’.The 63rd United Nations General Assembly adopted the resolutionof the draft articles on the Law of Transboundary Aquifers inDecember 2008. The draft articles of this resolution were preparedby the United Nations International Law Commission (ILC) incooperation with the United Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization (UNESCO) International HydrologicalProgramme (IHP) after six years of work and discussions. Themain concept of the law depends on the fact that groundwater,like oil and natural gas, is a shared natural resource. The AmericanSociety of International Law has evaluated the work by ILC asconstituting a ‘landmark event’ for the protection and managementof groundwater resources, which have been neglectedas a subject of international law despite the social, economic,environmental and strategic importance of groundwater. The36th International Association of Hydrogeologists InternationalConference was held in Toyama, Japan in October 2008, withthe main theme of Integrated Groundwater Science and HumanImage: J. ShimadaWell-being. The UNESCO Chair Workshop onInternational Strategy for Sustainable GroundwaterManagement: Transboundary Aquifers and IntegratedWatershed Management was held in October 2009 atthe University of Tsukuba, Japan.These recent waves of activity on groundwater indicatethat thinking on this resource has shifted fromdevelopment to management, and that managementendeavours should be developed keeping in mindthat groundwater is a shared natural resource. Thisconcept is led by and based on scientific knowledgethat the natural groundwater flow system depends onan aquifer system whose boundaries do not coincidewith national state boundaries. It is a concept thatapplies not only to national states, but also to aquiferscrossing regional administrative boundaries within agiven country.In 2009 the Nobel Prize in Economics was awardedto Professor Elinor Ostrom (together with ProfessorOliver Williamson) for her distinguished research workon ‘economic governance, especially the commons’.Professor Ostrom found that for the suitable managementof commons, it is necessary for a self-governancesystem to be established by demand-side communitiesand not only controlled by the national government orthe capital market system. It is said that the transboundarygroundwater resources management implementedin the Kumamoto region is an excellent example of atypical self-governance system established by the localgovernment and the city people (the demand-sidecommunities using 100 per cent groundwater resourcesfor their domestic water use) for managing regionalgroundwater resources.As mentioned above, under Japanese law there is nounified national law to manage groundwater resourcesas a whole. Therefore, groundwater resources in Japanare mainly managed by the local government’s ordinancewhich is limited to cover the area within thatgovernment’s boundary and does not coincide withthe boundary of groundwater reservoirs, namely thetransboundary aquifers. Recently, however, Japanesemunicipalities, communities and citizens have becomeaware that the groundwater resource is a sharednatural resource and they are finding ways to definethis concept and include it in their groundwater reserveordinances or practices.The concept of transboundary aquifers provides a veryimportant perspective on groundwater as a shared naturalresource – and the realization that we must coexist withthese limited and important natural resources in orderto ensure human well-being. As the world’s water needscontinue to grow, groundwater will become increasinglyimportant and the creation of wisdom with regardto coexisting with groundwater is an increasingly urgentissue. The establishment of a self-governance systemdepending on the autonomy of the demand-side communitiesfor groundwater resources management will helpto ensure an adequate water supply for the future, especiallyfor our future generations.[ 91 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTTransboundary water management in the Zambeziand Congo river basins: a situation analysisNgosa Howard Mpamba, Assistant Director, Water Resources Management and Christopher Chileshe, Director,Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development, Department of Water Affairs, ZambiaThe Republic of Zambia lies entirely within two of Africa’smajor transboundary river basins, the Zambezi RiverBasin and the Congo River Basin. Zambia is also thesource of these two internationally important river systems. TheZambezi basin is shared by eight countries, while 10 countriesshare the Congo basin, underlining the importance of transboundarywater management in the region.The Zambezi River Basin is shared by countries such as Zambia,Angola, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Malawi and Tanzania.It has more than 40 million inhabitants and covers an area of 1.39million km 2 . The river flows into the Indian Ocean after traversinga distance of 2,574 km from a source located in the north-westernpart of Zambia.The Congo River Basin is shared by countries such as Zambia,the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Angola, Burundi,Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Republic of the Congo,Rwanda and Tanzania. It covers an area of just over 4 millionkm 2 . The Congo river crosses a distance of 4,700 km from itssource in the north-eastern part of Zambia before flowing intothe Atlantic Ocean.According to the water resources master plan for Zambia, 75per cent of the country’s territory is in the Zambezi River Basinand 25 per cent in the Congo River Basin. Withinthe boundaries of Zambia, the Zambezi River Basincomprises three major river systems: the uppermain Zambezi, Kafue and Luangwa. The CongoRiver Basin comprises two major river systems,namely the Chambeshi-Luapula and Tanganyika.The Chambeshi river whose source is in the northeasternpart of Zambia, and the Zambezi River whosesource is in the north-western part of Zambia, aregenerally considered the source of the Zambezi andCongo rivers respectively. This is in line with theworldwide acceptable hydrological practice of usingthe longest tributary to define the source of a river.The internally-generated renewable water resourcesin Zambia are estimated at 100 km 3 of surface waterand 49.6 km 3 of groundwater, and represent 8,700m 3 per person per year. The Kafue river system hasthe highest population distribution followed by theZambezi river system, with the Luangwa river systemranking third.A situation analysis will outline Zambia’s preparednessand participation in transboundary watermanagement. This is based on the national legalThe Congo and Zambezi river basinsChadNigeriaCentral African RepublicSudanEthiopiaTanzaniaCameroonEq. GuineaAtlanticOceanGabonRep.CongoDem. Rep. CongoUgandaRwandaBurundiTanzaniaKenyaAngolaZambiaZambezi RiverZimbabweMalawiMozambiqueAngolaZambiaMozambiqueMalawiNamibiaBotswanaIndianOceanSource: World Water Congress, 2008, SADC, 1995 & Phiri, 2007[ 92 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTframework, secondary data, reports, publications, key informantinterviews and presentations shared at the Sub-Saharan Africa WaterSector Reform Consultative Meeting organized by the Republicof Zambia in Lusaka in June 2013. A further examination of thewater sector reform process in Zambia, with respect to the existingregional and international water resources management instruments,will enable an evaluation of how these have influenced andshaped the water sector reforms.Until October 2012, the Water Act Cap 198 of 1949 was theprincipal act for the allocation of surface water resources throughthe system of water rights. The major constraints of this law werethat it did not elaborate on sustainable water resource managementpractices and never provided for groundwater regulationand international water resource management. However, at theregional and international levels, Zambia has been a signatory to anumber of international treaties related to the water sector. Theseinclude the Southern African Development Community (SADC)revised protocol on shared watercourses, the United NationsPopulation of Zambia’s major river systemsMajor river system in ZambiaZambeziKafueLuangwaChambeshi-LuapulaTanganyikaSource: Modified after JICA Report, 1995The six catchments in ZambiaMwinilungaANGOLAKwandoDEMOCRATIC REPUBLICOF CONGOZambeziZAMBEZIKolweziSiomaNgwezi N.P.NAMIBIA BOTSWANALumbumbashiKAFUESource: National Water Policy, 2010LikasiChingolaPopulation distribution (%)23.7239.9818.316.881.13LuanshyaL. MweruKafue N.P. KabweKaomaZAMBIALusakaLivingstoneZIMBABWETANGANYIKALUAPULACHAMBESHILuapulaL. KaribaL. BangweuluMufuliraNdolaL. Tanganyika TANZANIAChambeshiLUANGWAMuchinga MountainsMOZAMBIQUEVila do ZumboMALAWINational ParksInternational boundaryRoadsConvention on the Law of Non-Navigational Uses ofInternational Watercourses, the Ramsar Convention,the United Nations Framework Convention onClimate Change and the United Nations Conventionon Biological Diversity. Furthermore, it is also asignatory to two international agreements on theshared management of Lake Tanganyika and theKariba Dam on the Zambezi river. Lack of provisionfor the management of international waters inthe 1949 Water Act created a dilemma for Zambiaover whether to sign the Zambezi WatercourseManagement Commission (ZamCom) agreement in2004. As such, Zambia needed to consult its stakeholdersbefore signing the agreement. However, aspart of the efforts to facilitate benefit sharing in theZambezi River Basin, Zambia embarked on watersector reforms. Technical cooperation in the ZambeziRiver Basin also exists among the large hydropowerdam operators and government institutions throughthe Joint Operations Technical Committee involvingZambia, Zimbabwe and Mozambique. Furthermore,frequent droughts and floods have brought in anotherdimension of technical cooperation on hydrologicaldata exchange between Zambia and Mozambique.Two key government ministries are directlyinvolved in Zambia’s water sector reforms. One is theMinistry of Mines, Energy and Water Developmentwhich is currently responsible for water, under whichthe Department of Water Affairs (DWA) has beenperforming water resources management functions.The other is the Ministry of Local Government andHousing (MLGH), under which the Department ofHousing and Infrastructure Development (DHID) isresponsible for water supply and sanitation functions.In the early 1970s, the Government of the Republicof Zambia (GRZ) initiated a dialogue on water sectorreforms. Three key reports were prepared:• the DWA report on the proposed Zambia NationalWater Authority (July 1979)• the report by Zambia Industrial and MiningCorporation on the establishment of the proposedNational Water Authority (1985)• the report by the Ministry of Decentralizationon the Reorganization Study of the Water andSanitation Sector in Zambia (1988).However, it was not until 1994 that GRZ officiallyembarked on the implementation of the water sectorreforms with regard to policy formulation, re-examiningthe legal and institutional framework and bringingit in line with modern principles of water governanceand other pieces of legislation.The first National Water Policy was adopted in 1994,primarily to guide the restructuring of the water sectorwith a focus on the water supply and sanitation subsector.Hence, water supply and sanitation functions weretransferred from the ministry responsible for water to theMLGH. This was followed by major achievements in thedevelopment of the legal and institutional framework,[ 93 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTImage: N.H. MpambaImage: N.H. MpambaCommunity dam management meeting in Gwembe DistrictA rural water supply borehole in Gwembe Districtas evidenced by the Water Supply and Sanitation Act of 1997; theestablishment of the National Water Supply and Sanitation Council(NWASCO) as a regulator for service provision under the water supplyand sanitation subsector; the creation of commercial utilities (CUs)owned by local authorities for improved water supply and sanitationservice provision in urban and peri-urban areas; the establishmentof the Devolution Trust Fund (a pro-poor fund currently supportedby cooperating partners to facilitate investment for improved watersupply and sanitation service provision in peri-urban areas by CUs);and the provision of support for the sustainable operation and maintenanceof rural water supply facilities by user communities. Watersector reforms in Zambia have been guided by the following sevensector principles adopted by GRZ in 1994:• separation of water resources managementfrom water supply and sanitation• separation of regulatory and executive functions• devolution of authority to local authorities andprivate enterprises• full cost recovery in the long term• human resources development leading to more effectiveinstitutions• technology appropriate to local conditions• increased GRZ priority and budget spending to the sector.More importantly, Zambia can now state that 61 per cent of therural population have access to improved safe water supply sourcesand 48 per cent have access to adequate sanitation. The statistics forurban areas are 78 per cent and 50 per cent respectively.In order to address shortcomings and enhanceservice provision in the water resources managementsubsector, the 1994 National Water Policywas revised in 2010. The revised policy now hasprovisions for the management of water resources atcatchment level in the country to ensure efficiency,and provisions for the development of a legal andinstitutional framework for management of internationalwaters. It also recognizes that water is a scarceand precious resource, and thereby outlines thebroad principles that govern the management of thecountry’s water resources in a sustainable manner.Most importantly, the policy reinforces integratedwater resources management as the guiding principleto optimally harness water resources for efficientand sustainable utilization for enhanced economicproductivity and poverty reduction. The country isnow subdivided into six catchments: Zambezi, Kafue,Luangwa, Chambeshi, Luapula and Tanganyika.To complete the water sector reforms that started in1994 with the water supply and sanitation subsector,the Zambian parliament enacted the Water ResourcesManagement (WRM) Act, No. 21 of 2011 as a newlegal framework for the water resources managementsubsector. Unlike the 1949 Water Act, the new legalframework specifically includes the regulation ofgroundwater and provides for the establishment ofinstitutions responsible for water resources manage-[ 94 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTFishing at a dam in Chipata Districtment at national, catchment and subcatchment levels, with strongsector stakeholder participation through water users’ associationsto enhance water governance. Furthermore, the WRM Actrecognizes water as a finite and vulnerable resource, and includesspecific provisions that recognize the responsibilities linked tothe transboundary nature of managing shared water resourceswith a focus on the principles of equity for meeting variousnational water demands and sharing the water of transboundaryriver basins. The Water Resources Management Authority(WARMA), a semi-autonomous catchment management institutionwith catchment and subcatchment councils, was establishedin October 2012. With the WARMA board in place, a stepwiseapproach has been adopted as a strategy for the operationalizationof WARMA from 2013, with a focus on establishing effectivewater users’ associations to facilitate the decentralization of waterresources management service provision. Ongoing water sectorreforms in the water resources management subsector entail theestablishment of a government department responsible for waterresources planning and policy development, and the reorganizationof the DWA in light of the water resources managementfunctions delegated to WARMA.External cooperation from Zambia’s development partnerstakes the form of financing for the water sector on a bilateral andmultilateral, as well as a project approach basis. This has beencritical to the success of the water sector reforms. The supporthas come from countries such as Germany, Denmark, Ireland,Japan, the United States and China among others, and institutionssuch as the Global Water Partnership, European Union,Image: N.F. NgomaAfrican Development Bank and World Bank. SADChas also provided an effective strategic frameworkto Zambia through the revised Protocol on SharedWatercourses and the Regional Strategic Action Plan.Consensus has now been reached on the importanceof Zambia’s participation in the management of transboundarywater resources as a shared responsibilitywith other riparian states.Regional integration and benefit sharing throughriver basin institutions in both the Zambezi and Congoriver basins are a priority for Zambia as it implementsthe legal and institutional framework for the waterresources management subsector. Immediate plansinclude strengthening WARMA and related catchmentinstitutions, capacity building at all levels, developmentof the water resources management strategic plan,catchment plans, collaborative research and projectimplementation, and the re-examination of investmentsfor water-related infrastructure. Examples ofZambia’s current participation in active transboundarywater management include the management of LakeTanganyika by Tanzania, the Democratic Republicof the Congo, Burundi and Zambia through the LakeTanganyika Authority; and management of the KaribaDam Complex with its hydrology by Zimbabwe andZambia. In addition, Zambia has recently indicatedthat it will become part of ZamCom following itssuccessful completion of the water resources managementsubsector. The establishment of the Water SectorAdvisory Group comprising key sector stakeholders,and the coordination of donors through a joint assistancestrategy, was another important milestone inZambia’s water sector reforms.Last, but not least, Zambia is a landlocked countrywith a population now standing at more than 13million. Its river systems are characterized by floodplainsand dambos. Major wetlands are the Kafue flats,Lukanga swamps, Barotse plain, Bangweulu swamps,Liuwa plain, Busanga and Luena. According to Vision2030, Zambia is geared to attaining the status of amiddle-income country through sustainable use ofwater resources to support the main economic pillarsof the economy. The immediate demands for wateruse include domestic, environment, hydropower,irrigation, industrial and mining. However, Zambia’shydropower potential is about 6,000 MW against thedeveloped 1,788 MW; and the irrigation potential isabout 520,000 ha of land out of which only 30 percent is currently irrigated. Mining activities are alsoon the increase.Zambia has made good progress in its water sectorreforms although these reforms have generally beenslow and lengthy, partly due to the national stakeholderconsultative process. Nevertheless, there isevidence that Zambia has positioned itself for effectivetransboundary water resources managementfrom the viewpoint of its policy, planning process,envisaged collaborative opportunities and legal andinstitutional frameworks.[ 95 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTInteractive open source information systemsfor fostering transboundary water cooperationJ. Ganoulis, Coordinator and Ch. Skoulikaris, Secretary, United Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization Chair/International Network of Water-Environment Centres for the BalkansThe world is undergoing a historic transformation with theexplosion of new information and communication technologies(ICTs) which have drastically changed methodsof international cooperation through the development of intraandinter-electronic networks. The use of new web-basedtechnologies for regional networking and distance cooperationpresents an opportunity to face challenges in a new way.The case of internationally shared water resources management andgovernance is of particular interest, because it combines physical, technical,environmental, economical and political issues on regional, national,international and multicultural scales, and because it requires a multidisciplinaryapproach at every level. The United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Chair/InternationalNetwork of Water-Environment Centres for the Balkans (INWEB)has developed and maintains on its website different geo-referencedopen-source cooperative information systems, with the principal aim offacilitating cooperation and exchange of experience between scientistsand stakeholders working in different socioeconomic environments, onthe management and governance of transboundary water resources. 1Open source cooperative information systemsThe world is witnessing a revolution in the way information is shared andhow communication takes place. With the recent exponential progressAn inventory of transboundary non-Danubian surface waters in SEESource: UNESCO Chair/INWEBof science and technology and the global communicationsrevolution spearheaded by the Internet, innovations inorganization, operational methods and communicationhave been adopted by the vast majority of economic activities.New materials, products and software all appear on themarket so fast that it has become difficult to keep up to date.In the late 1970s, when software became independentfrom the hardware that had been used to create the firstIBM computers in the early 1950s, different groups initiatedthe ‘open source’ software movement. In the 1990s, thewell-known Unix and Linux open source operating systemsclearly differentiated open source licenses from commercialones. Open source software makes the source code availablefor anybody to use or modify and it is very suitable forpromoting cooperation, learning and understanding. Withopen source software such as Open Office, users are grantednot only the right of functionality, as in the use of MicrosoftOffice, but can also own and modify the methodology.Examples of popular open source software products includeMozilla Firefox and Thunderbird, Google Chrome, Androidand the Apache Open Office Suite. Google is one of thebiggest companies supporting the open source movementand has developed more than 500 open source projects.In the international environment, cooperation amongscientific communities and countries is vital for the protectionand management of shared water resource systemsthat cross national boundaries, to safeguard against pollutionand floods, and to plan major infrastructure works forthe development of internationally shared water basins.Successful regional cooperation requires that all participantsunderstand the importance of sharing informationand knowledge at the appropriate time.Information systems for water cooperationThe UNESCO Chair/INWEB is an internationalnetwork of experts that aims to facilitate the exchangeof information in the field of transboundary water;develop and maintain online inventories, informationsystems and databases; promote training and professionaleducation possibly by using new media anddistance learning; and contribute to public educationand sensitization in the field of water-environment.One of INWEB’s early activities was to develop inventoriesof transboundary surface waters in South-EasternEurope (SEE). Transboundary river and lake basins[ 96 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTlocated outside the Danube watershed were identified. The Mesta/Nestos River, shared by Bulgaria and Greece, and the Prespa Lakes,shared by three SEE countries, were two cases aimed at enhancingcooperation that gave promising results.The main difficulties arising in transboundary water resourcesmanagement and governance are a lack of:• political willingness for cooperation from countries on one orboth sides of the border and limited or non-effective exchangeof data and information• communication and understanding between scientists, waterprofessionals, decision makers, stakeholders and the general public.The principal aim of the developed georeferenced systems and platformswas to provide the appropriate tools needed to strengthenthe capacity of water management institutions in the SEE region toimplement sustainable forms of utilization, management and protectionof transboundary water resources.The structure of the information systems, and the technologies usedfor their construction and design aim to:• facilitate water users to retrieve data related to transboundarywater resources• enable the national experts responsible for a country’s waterresources to use the system’s capabilities to update in real timeinformation about the water bodies available on the platform• support public participation by allowing users to provide comments(either general comments or those related to a specific geolocation)on the shared water basins that appear on the base map• automatically generate e-mails to the workgroup whenevercomments are made.During the project implementation, an interactive map using GoogleMaps and Google Earth technologies was initially developed. Thiswas based on existing maps indicating basic geographic informationon transboundary water basins (location, boundaries, extent)(Version 1 of the georeferenced information system). After collectingand working on the data and the descriptive questionnaires submittedby the national experts of the countries participating inthe project, the initial georeferenced information systemwas updated (Version 2 of the system). The final versioncouples a Google cloud database, in which all the relativeinformation is stored, with Google Fusion Tables technology,in order to spatially distribute the information onthe total study area. JavaScript and the HTML5 programminglanguages were used for the creation of the platform.Furthermore, both these languages were used for sendingrequests and exchanging data asynchronously betweenbrowser and server to avoid full page reloads. Geographicinformation systems tools were used for the homogenizationof the different vector files representing the aquifers(namely shape files) and for their projection to a commonprojection system (namely WGS 84).The final version of the system incorporates all theattributes and characteristics of the second version aswell as including:• presentation of a summary of the main data on eachbasin (excerpts from questionnaires)• option to download descriptive information on thebasins in pdf format (questionnaires)• option to download the national reports on eachaquifer in pdf format• pop-up box with attributes for each countryparticipating in the project• integration of a ‘search’ module• selection between four different backgroundthematic Google maps• visualization of the spatial extent of the basins• demonstration of a comprehensive legend tool• ability to leave comments, either of a general natureor related to a specific geolocation• automated e-mail notification to the identifiedproject recipients whenever comments are made.Case study: the Prespa LakesGeographical location of the Prespa LakesImage: UNESCO Chair/INWEBPrespa Park is situated on the borders of Albania, Greece and the Former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia (FYROM). The area of 2,519 km 2 consists of two lakes:Micro Prespa and Macro Prespa, and the surrounding forested mountain slopes.It has no surface outflow, but a subterraneous water flow brings water from theMacro Prespa into the Ohrid Lake basin, and from there to the Adriatic Sea. It isbest known for its natural beauty, its great biodiversity and its populations of rarewater birds –including the largest breeding colony of the Dalmatian pelican inthe world. The area is also remarkable for its cultural sites, including Byzantinemonuments and examples of traditional architecture.The Prespa Lakes provide an excellent example of how transboundaryenvironmental issues and conflict can be the way to encourage internationalcooperation among neighbouring nations 2 .On World Wetlands Day on 2 February 2000, the prime ministers of Albania,Greece, and FYROM decided to make the Prespa Park the first transboundaryprotected area in SEE and declared it a Ramsar Protected Site. The declarationhas been followed by enhanced cooperation among competent authorities inthe three countries with regard to environmental matters. In this context, jointactions have been considered in order to:• maintain and protect the unique ecological values of the Prespa Park• prevent and/or reverse the causes of its habitat degradation• explore appropriate management methods for the sustainable useof the Prespa Lakes water• ensure that the Prespa Park becomes and remains a model of itskind as well as being an example of peaceful collaboration amongthe three countries.[ 97 ]
TRANSBOUNDARY WATER MANAGEMENTThe main features of an open source interactive information systemare detailed below.Data catalogue (data layers)The data catalogue is a listing of available datasets including informationabout the layers which are overlaid on the map. The specificmodule enables the activation and deactivation of layers related tothe extent of the river basin and the project countries.View window (thematic maps)The specific module is the viewer of the mapping interface. It includesthe four different types of base maps: standard, satellite, hybrid andterrain maps. These are supported by the Google Maps web mappingservice application and technology provided by Google. It alsoincludes navigation tools (zoom in, zoom out and the pan arrows)and a scale bar both in kilometres and miles. Moreover, the mappinginterface supports the overlaying of the countries’ boundaries andextents as well as the overlaying of the identified aquifer’s extent.Information windowThe window also integrates links with synoptic and detailedsummary information, descriptive information and country reportson the river basins.Search tool and feedback menuThe feedback menu, appears when users click on the button ‘Clickhere to give feedback’. In order for a comment to be sent to the projectparticipants, the person making the comments has to provide their fullname and e-mail address. There are two types of comments: generalcomments and comments referring to a specific geolocation. In thelatter case, users should click on the map, so that the coordinates of thespecific location are automatically integrated into the comments form.Different georeferenced information systems for transboundarywaters are hosted on the UNESCO Chair/INWEB portal under the ‘Databases’ menu tab. Thismenu contains similar interactive databases on transboundarysurface and groundwater in SEE, NorthernAfrica and the Middle East.Collaboration is the key to transcending and crossingboundaries between countries or between differentadministrations, institutions and groups of stakeholderswithin the same country. When rivers, lakes andaquifer systems cross political boundaries, the issue ofhaving good governance for water resources managementbecomes very complex and difficult to attain.Again the key for resolving such problems is collaborationbetween institutes, decision-making authorities,water professionals and stakeholders.Modern ICTs can facilitate distance dialoguebetween the above parties, by providing interactivelyon the Internet spatially distributed data and distancebasedcollaborative tools. New tools and interactivemaps can be put together by using open source softwaresuch as Google Maps, Google API and GoogleFusion Tables technologies.The progress made in developing such collaborativetools is shown in the case studies from SEE. By usingspecially tailored collaborative information systems, thedata collected from different countries were communicatedto stakeholders at a local level in such a way asto facilitate their involvement in the decision-makingprocess. Different aggregations of conflicting multiplecriteria can help in producing alternative solutions forsustainable groundwater resources management.Case study: the Mesta/Nestos RiverImage: J. GanoulisImage: UNESCO Chair/INWEBThe Mesta/Nestos downstream gorges in GreeceThe Mesta/Nestos river basinThe transboundary Mesta/Nestos River watershed extends over Bulgariaand Greece. The Mesta River springs out from the Rila and Pirin mountainranges and flows into a graben plain bordered by the granite formation ofthe Rhodopes mountains. Changing its name into Nestos when crossing theborder between the two countries, the river cuts its gorges through the vastmarble karstic formation of the Lekani. Its course finally ends in a highlyirrigated deltaic plain before reaching the Agean Sea. The Mesta/NestosBasin extends over 5,751 km 2 , of which 2,314 km 2 are situated in Greece.The Bulgarian part of the basin is primarily a mountainous agricultureregion, although there are several urban areas and the recent developmentof ski resorts. Being one of the few high-quality freshwater resources inSouth-West Bulgaria, the Mesta river basin is the site of storage dams andwater diversions, both in the present and planned for the future. On theGreek side, there are several large and recently constructed hydropowerdams in the Upper Nestos River. Further extensions of this dam complexare under study as part of an irrigation development project which couldserve the areas of Drama, Xanthi and the Nestos Delta.In the past, Bulgaria and Greece signed a bilateral treaty regulating theamount of water used for serving their national interests. Both Greece andBulgaria are obliged to apply the European Union (EU) Water FrameworkDirective as they are EU member states, Bulgaria having joined in 2007.Good cooperation exists between the two countries and several water-relatedprojects have been developed in the basin, which is one of the UNESCO/Hydrology, Environment, Life and Policy programme’s demonstration basins. 3[ 98 ]
IIIWater Educationand InstitutionalDevelopment
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTCapacity development for water cooperationDr Reza Ardakanian and Lis Mullin Bernhardt, UN-Water Decade Programme on Capacity DevelopmentThe year 2013 is of particular significance to UN-Water,the United Nations coordination mechanism for waterrelatedissues: not only does it mark the 10-yearanniversary of UN-Water’s founding, but it is also, through theInternational Year of Water Cooperation (IYWC 2013), servingto cast a spotlight on the importance of cooperation in waterrelatedsectors. Indeed, this desire for cooperation on waterissues was a key reason for the formation of UN-Water, whichwas created in order to foster greater collaboration and informationsharing among existing United Nations agency membersand external partners. 1The need for strengthened collaboration and coherence amongthe United Nations entities dealing with freshwater and sanitationissues is as great today as it was when UN-Water was founded. AsUN-Water’s capacity development office, the UN-Water DecadeProgramme on Capacity Development (UNW-DPC) 2 fosterscooperation in capacity development activities in abroader sense that has impact beyond the boundariesof UN-Water.The case for capacity development inwater cooperationCapacity development and cooperation are fundamentallylinked and mutually dependent. It is nocoincidence that one of the five major objectives ofIYWC 2013 relates to it, explicitly calling for theneed to “enhance knowledge and develop capacityfor water cooperation”. 3Water cooperation can take on different forms ofmeaning, design and application depending on thenature, aspect and context of cooperation. It has political,educational, scientific, cultural, ethical, social,religious, legal, institutional and economic facets.Image: UN-HabitatUsed safely, wastewater can help to alleviate the increasing pressure on freshwater resources, particularly in urban and peri-urban areas[ 100 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTTwo capacity development projects of UN-Water demonstratethe educational and capacity building aspects of water cooperation.In doing so, they highlight the importance of collaboratingat different levels and the varied forms of cooperation needed inthe water sector.Safe Use of Wastewater in AgricultureCompetition for water and the growing focus on food security, especiallyin urban and peri-urban areas, are increasing the pressureon (fresh)water resources exponentially. Wastewater is a resourcewhich can, when used safely, alleviate this pressure. But to makeuse of it safely, national policies and strategies need to be in place.Despite an interest in using certain wastewaters in agriculture, manynations have difficulties implementing the available guidelines anddeveloping the right strategies. At the same time, it is clear that thereis a large amount of unknown (or unreported) use of wastewaterin countries which might not understand the potential health andenvironmental risks associated with it.UNW-DPC, under the auspices of UN-Water, is addressingthis issue by bundling the competences and experiences of itsmembers and partners, entering into an intense dialogue withcountries from around the world. The Safe Use of Wastewaterin Agriculture (SUWA) project brings together and facilitatescooperation among experts from six UN-Water members andpartners from different fields including agriculture, water treatment,irrigation, health, environment and related themes. The sixentities involved are the World Health Organization, the Foodand Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), theUnited Nations Environment Programme, the United NationsUniversity Institute for Water, Environment and Health, theInternational Commission on Irrigation and Drainage, and theInternational Water Management Institute. SUWAfacilitates improved capacities among stakeholders,decision makers and experts by creating a commonplatform for the exchange of knowledge and experience.The aim of the project is to address issues relatedto wastewater use in agriculture with a sustainable,effective and less risky approach, to formulate acapacity development action plan, and to disseminatetraining materials and learning methods at thecountry level. To ensure success and sustainability forwater cooperation schemes, a common understandingof the needs and challenges surrounding the issue ofwastewater is required. Implementing SUWA entailsmultidimensional cooperation and concerted effortsfrom various disciplines.The level of cooperation required to execute a projectlike SUWA is considerable, not only between the partnersinvolved at the United Nations level, but alsobetween those at the national level. Indeed, addressingwastewater use in a safe and productive way foragriculture necessarily involves many partners andstakeholders who need to be engaged in the decision-makingprocess, across a range of sectors. It alsorequires different levels of cooperation between policymakers,communities and water use associations.Cooperation in SUWA: levels and dimensionsCapacity development in SUWA is understood as “theprocess through which relevant stakeholders, especiallythose from sanitation, agriculture, environment andImage: UNU-UNW-DPCImage: IRRIAddressing wastewater use in a safe and productive way for agriculture involvesmany partners and stakeholdersWastewater use in agriculture may be planned or unplanned – itssafe use requires capacity development and education[ 101 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTThe impacts of drought are diverse and complex, threatening crop yields,productivity, livestock and wildlifeconsumer sectors, improve their abilities to perform their core rolesand responsibilities, solve problems, define and achieve objectives,understand and address needs and effectively work together in orderto ensure the safe and productive use of wastewater in agriculture”. 4This definition carries important implications for the differentlevels of cooperation and capacity development activities atthe individual, organizational and system levels. At the systemlevel, several government ministries with their own policies,laws, regulations and standards cooperate and exchange experienceson wastewater use in agriculture to raise awareness amongeach other and learn from successful policies in similar contexts.At the organizational level, government agencies and institutionssuch as ministries of agriculture, water, environment andhealth can cooperate and capitalize on their experiences from thediverse nature of the respective ministries with respect to infrastructure,human, financial and information resources. At theindividual level, various skilled professionals from public health,agriculture, research, engineering, education and other sectorscan exchange experiences and share lessons with each other.Cooperation is at the heart of the SUWA project structure:between individuals, between institutions and organizations, andbetween governments. Through its regional workshops and onlineplatform 5 , the project has:• drawn on the international expertise, standards and innovationsof various expert groups and research institutes involved in thespirit of cooperation work• enabled knowledge and technology sharing among participantsand learning from each others’ experience of best practiceimplementation, especially those between planning andmanagement bodies from various developing countries• ensured the cooperation of UN-Water members and partners aswell as other collaborative partners of the project• improved knowledge and skills on the safe use of wastewaterin agriculture, also acquired through the exchange of lessonslearned and the cooperation of participants with each other.Image: Curt CarnemarkCapacity Development to Support NationalDrought Management Policies initiativeDrought is one of the world’s worst natural hazards, 6with long-term social, economic and environmentalimpacts, and often referred to as a “creeping phenomenon”.7 Generally, droughts emanate from a deficiencyof precipitation extended over a long period of time.Yet there is no single, universally accepted definitionof drought because of its multifaceted nature and itsdiverse impacts across regions.What is clear, however, is that the impacts ofdrought are diverse and complex in nature. The mostdirect impacts include reduced crop yield, diminishedrangeland and forest productivity and low water levels.Drought threatens livestock as well as wildlife and fishhabitats while it increases fire hazard. According to theInternational Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction in1995, drought accounts for 33 per cent of the peopleaffected by natural disasters, 22 per cent of the damagefrom disasters and 3 per cent of the number of deathsattributed to natural hazards. Though drought affectsvirtually all climatic regions, those most affectedinclude the horn of Africa, Australia, Brazil, CentralAsia, China, England and Wales, India, South-EasternEurope and the United States of America. Drought isexpected to increase in frequency and extent due toclimate change. The fraction of land surface area experiencingdrought conditions had grown from 10-15per cent in the early 1970s to more than 30 per centby early 2000. 8The newly started UN-Water initiative onCapacity Development to Support National DroughtManagement Policies was launched in March2013. Under UN-Water, the World MeteorologicalOrganization, United Nations Convention to CombatDesertification, FAO and UNW-DPC will cooperatein this initiative throughout 2012-2013 to raise thecapacity of stakeholders at all levels to support thedevelopment of risk-based national drought managementpolicies, based on elements proposed in thecompendium of drought management policy. 9Despite the repeated occurrence of drought andits tremendous effects on livelihoods and economiesthroughout human history, few concerted efforts aretaking place to formulate and adopt national droughtmanagement policies. Moving countries away fromcrisis management to a more proactive, risk-basedapproach to national drought management policiesrequires the involvement of stakeholders at differentlevels. To ensure the effectiveness of a transition tothe new paradigm, capacities need to be developed invarious ministries and national institutions.The differences between countries in terms of theirvulnerability and institutional capacities will call fordifferent drought management policies. As droughtmanagement strategies need to take into account thespecific national contexts of existing capacities andpriorities, no single, optimal drought managementstrategy can be prescribed for all countries. 10[ 102 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTCoping with extreme weatherand water-related disastersKaoru Takara, Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University, JapanExtreme weather events frequently take place in manyparts of the world, causing various kinds of waterrelateddisasters such as wind storms, floods, high tides,debris flows, droughts, and water-quality problems. This isa key issue for the sustainability and survival of our society.Interdisciplinary educational systems are necessary at all levelsfrom elementary to higher education, as well as social educationincluding the general public, industries and policymakers.Extreme weather and water-related disastersThe Asia-Pacific region is one of the most disaster-prone areasin the world. It is adversely affected by natural hazards such ascyclones (typhoons), rainstorms, floods, landslides, and tsunamiscaused by earthquakes and volcanic eruptions under the sea. TheseA community water post in a slum community in Ahmedabad, India; the communityset the tap below ground level to improve water pressureImage: Dr Akhilesh Surjan, GSS Programme, Kyoto Universitynatural hazards bring severe disasters to all countriesin the region where social change, in terms of populationand economic growth, is the most dynamic inthe world. 1Growth in this region has not, however, led toadvances in disaster risk management. The situationis getting worse because infrastructure developmentcannot keep up with growth. Policies for poverty reductionand alleviation are insufficient and the differencebetween the rich and the poor is increasing.Vulnerable populations are often those hit worst byhazards and disasters. As the world’s cities expand tooccupy greater portions of the world’s flood plains,riversides and shorelines, the risk of flooding willcontinue to outpace both structural and non-structuralmitigation efforts.“A natural hazard strikes when people lose theirmemory of the previous one.” This quotation is fromDr Torahiko Terada (1878–1935), a former Professorof the University of Tokyo who influenced manyJapanese people as an educator, physicist and philosopher.People tend to forget bad memories if they do notexperience a similar event for a long time. This ignoranceand lack of experience increases the vulnerabilityof society to disasters.Typical examplesIn 2012, Hurricane Sandy hit areas of the Caribbeanand the east coast of the United States. Economic lossfrom this hurricane in the US was estimated at morethan US$50 billion and more than 170 people werekilled. Another famous example is Hurricane Katrinain 2005, which killed at least 1,833 people and forwhich total property damage is said to have beenUS$81 billion.Hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons often causeserious damage due to strong wind, heavy rainfall andflooding in riverine and coastal areas. It is often saidthat their power will be increased by climate change,which means that more serious damage will take placein the future in many parts of the world.African countries and other arid and semi-aridregions suffer from water shortages, droughts, anddesertification. These are also brought about byextreme weather conditions that continue for longerperiods in wider areas.[ 103 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTMajor natural hazards and disasters in the twenty-first centuryYearLocationHazard typeEconomic Loss(Million US$)Death toll(people)2002Central EuropeFlood20,000+692003Central EuropeHeat wave13,000+70,000+2004Haiti, Dominique, etc.Flood, Hurricane Jeanne9,0003,025+2004India, Bangladesh, Nepal, etc.FloodN/A3,0762004Indonesia + 13 countriesIndian Ocean earthquake and tsunami14,000230,0002005USAHurricane Katrina14,4001,3222007BangladeshCyclone Sidr1,7003,4472008MyanmarCyclone Nargis10,000138,3662008USA + Caribbean countriesHurricanes Gustav and Ike4,0001702009TaiwanTyphoon Morakot, landslide3,3006782010ChileEarthquake, tsunami3,100525+2010RussiaHeat wave15,00055,000+2010PakistanFlood43,0001,781+2011JapanEarthquake, tsunami235,00015,8402011ThailandFlood4,000813Source: Munich Re, The Economist (14 January 2012), Wikipedia, etc.Higher fluctuation examples in EuropeExtreme meteorological variation is taking place. Europeans mayclearly remember the floods of 2002, severe snowfall events duringthe winters of 2002 and 2003 and the heat waves in 2003.During the 2002 floods, Europe received approximately 500 mmof rainfall produced by a low pressure that moved from the UnitedKingdom to central Europe during 9-12 August. The Elbe andDanube rivers caused much damage. Major urban areas of Dresdenand Prague, located respectively along the Elbe River and the VltavaRiver upstream, were inundated by flooding, which was said to becaused by an outdated irrigation system upstream. After this eventthe Czech and German governments discussed how to avoid a repeatof this kind of flood disaster. The Elbe River has long been contaminatedby industrial wastewater including heavy metals such asmercury, cadmium and lead, as well as chlorides. The managementof water in this river is of great importance to the countries situatedalong it. Rainstorm events from the end of May to the beginning ofJune in 2013 damaged these rivers by resultant floods, which weresmaller (3,200 m 3 /s) than the devastating flood event of 2002 withmore than 5,000 m 3 /s.In south-east France, a heavy rainfall of 687 mm in 24 hourson 8-9 September 2002 caused severe flooding in the Gard Riverbasin (2,070 km 2 ). There were 24 deaths, half of which occurredin privately owned cars, and economic loss of about €1.12 billion.These flood events were followed by heavy snowfall in the winterof 2002-2003, which was the second heaviest snow since 1967.The snow accumulated in the Alps melted and causedflood disasters.A very severe heat wave then came to Europe. Itkilled a total of 35,118 people in France (14,802),Germany (7,000), Spain (4,230), Italy (4,175), Portugal(1,316), Wales, UK (2,045), the Netherlands (1,400)and Belgium (150), according to the Earth PolicyInstitute. A maximum air temperature of more than35 °C continued from 4-13 August 2003, increasingthe death toll day by day with a peak of 2,197 on 12August. Even in developed European countries, sucha tragedy happened because many aged people lived inhouses where there was no air conditioning. In 2010,the northern hemisphere again faced significant damagefrom heat waves.Examples in Japan – tragedy in an ‘aged’ societyLikewise, the Asia-Pacific region is also affected byextreme weather. Ten typhoons directly hit Japan in2004, for example, while the overall annual averagenumber of typhoons to hit the country is usuallyfewer than three. The Japanese Meteorological Agencyreported that 326 people were killed in 2004 by thesetyphoons, other rainstorms and resultant flood events.Japan is now an ‘aged’ society (severer than an ‘ageing’society). In Niigata, in July 2004, flooding killed 15[ 104 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTelderly people. There were three main reasons for these deaths indifferent parts of the region. First, floodwaters 3 m deep damagedhouses directly and killed three elderly people (75-78 years old) whohad insisted on not leaving in their homes. Second, with a 1.5 m depthinundation, two people (a 37-year-old man and a 42-year-old woman)were killed while moving from their houses to the evacuation point.Third, many houses were inundated but not destroyed by the powerof the flood; therefore people remained on upper floors of their homesand did not lose their lives. Four elderly people living alone, however,drowned in floodwaters that rose just 1 m above floor level. Being76-88 years-old, sick or handicapped and without family membersor caretakers to assist them, they were unable to move to the secondfloor of their buildings. It is therefore important that we considerthese people the most vulnerable during such disasters. Welfare workshould be included in disaster management in such aged societies.Examples in Asian countriesSevere flooding events were caused by cyclones in Bangladeshin 2007 and in Myanmar in 2008. Similar events occurred inBangladesh in 1991, killing 138,866 people and causing economicloss of US$7.6 billion. However, Cyclone Sidr in 2007 killed 3,363people and caused economic loss of US$3.1 billion. The reasons forthe lower number of deaths and economic loss were:• the 1991 cyclone passed through a more densely populatedarea than Sidr in 2007• the 1991 cyclone occurred during the rainy season, while Sidroccurred during the dry season• disaster prevention education and information disseminationsystems have improved, raising awareness of and the need forpreparedness for cyclone disasters• investment in cyclone shelters has increased• meteorological forecasting and early warning systems havebeen improved• overall educational levels have increased, for example the literacyrate in Bangladesh has increased from 20 per cent to 50 per cent.The first two reasons listed above are natural conditions,whereas the rest are related to social or humanefforts to reduce or manage risk. Note, however,that in Myanmar, where education and awarenessof disaster risk reduction and management needshave been minimal, 100,000 people were killed and220,000 recorded as missing due to Cyclone Nargisin May 2008.These examples in Bangladesh and Myanmarsuggest that basic risk management measures areimportant, especially in developing countries. Peoplein the developed world can learn from those in developingcountries. Advanced flood risk managementnot only includes so-called ‘high-tech’ measures butalso ‘low-tech’, economical and achievable measures.Social capital and social technology are also essentialfor the implementation of any kind of flood riskmanagement measures.In 2011, the flooding in the Chao Phraya River basin(157,925 km 2 ) continued for several months from Julyto December due to four typhoons. It adversely affectednearly 13.5 million people, more than 4 millionhouses, and agricultural land of 1.8 million ha in 65prefectures. The death toll was 749 in 44 prefectures.This long-lasting flood also adversely affected eightindustrial parks in and around Bangkok. According tothe Japan External Trade Organization, 804 factories(449 Japanese enterprises) in seven industrial parkswere damaged. The influence was so serious that manycompanies stopped their activities. Economic loss wasestimated at US$2.2 billion in total. The importanceof the business continuity plan was highlighted inthis event, because many kinds of supply chain werestopped in many industries, with serious impacts onthe international economy.Images: MLITPumping cars drain water at (l) Watari Town, Miyagi, Japan after the earthquake and tsunami in March 2011 and (r) Bangkadi Industrial Park, Bangkok, Thailandduring the Chao Phraya flood in November 2011[ 105 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTWater cooperation and disaster risk reductionMany kinds of cooperation activities have been implementedin terms of water. Japanese official development assistance hasbeen contributing to developing countries by constructing waterresources systems, flood control facilities and other infrastructures,such as dams, channels, water supply and irrigation systems in cooperationwith the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).These structural measures have prevented or mitigated water-relateddisasters and their risk.In addition to these, another type of contribution includes emergencymanagement. After the Great Earthquake and Tsunamidisasters in east Japan, including Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushimaprefectures, there was land subsidence in a number of low-lyingareas where water inundation in residential districts, as well asin agricultural lands, was a serious problem. The pumping cars,which were prepared by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,Transport and Tourism of Japan (MLIT), played a significant rolein the drainage of inundated water. The pumping cars were alsodispatched to the Chao Phraya River in order to drain floodwaterin Bangkok and surrounding areas. This was a notable watercooperation activity made by MLIT and JICA. Other water cooperationexamples can be seen in activities by the Japan Water Forum(JWF), which carries out water supply and sanitation activitiesat the grass-roots level through assistance to non-governmentalorganizations and collaboration with local partners in developingcountries. The JWF Fund awards grants of up to US$1,000 toapproximately 15 grass-roots organizations in developing countriesevery year, to support their activities and projects to improveaccess to water and sanitation. 2It is also important to bear in mind that risk communicationmeasures are useful in raising public awareness and preparednessfor coping with floods and droughts as well as waterborne disastersincluding epidemiological infectious diseases such as malaria,which are triggered by environmental or climatic drivers. Literacy,communication skills and gender issues must be seriously consid-Women collect water from surface sources in the coastal Satkhira district ofBangladesh, where water bodies are mostly salineImage: Dr Rajib Shaw, GSS Programme, Kyoto Universityered. Many cooperation activities for water-relateddisaster risk reduction are implemented throughinternational programmes such as UN Water and theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization International Hydrological Programme,of which the eighth phase (2014-2021) will deal withwater security issues. 3Academic contributionsInterdisciplinary approaches at university (graduateschool) level include the Global COE Programfor ‘Sustainability/Survivability Science for a ResilientSociety Adaptable to Extreme Weather Conditions’(GCOE-ARS), implemented by the Disaster PreventionResearch Institute (DPRI) at Kyoto University, Japan. 4This programme focuses on how human beings andhuman society could adapt to global-scale changesincluding climate change that incur extreme weatherand changes in the Earth’s water cycle, populationincrease, urbanization, land use change, rural development,desertification and so on. It especially emphasizesscientific explanation and the prediction of weather andhydrological disasters as well as social adaptation tothese events.In Asia, as stated above, located in a humid climateand tectonic zone, overpopulation and land developmentare escalating. Africa has arid and semi-aridregions as well as tropical rainforests. The environmentalconditions in these areas are more severe thanelsewhere in the world in terms of social and naturalaspects, and thus especially sensitive and vulnerable toextreme weather. The people’s living and economy inthese areas provide implications for the survivabilityof humans on Earth, while at the same time requiringadaptation strategies to cope with more difficultconditions expected in the future. GCOE-ARS pursuessustainability science for survivability of humankindand fosters world-leading experts by developing practicalresearch in these areas in the world.Another similar programme is ‘Inter-GraduateSchool Program for Sustainable Development andSurvival Societies’ (Global Survivability Studies (GSS)Programme), which was launched in 2011 to form astrong interdisciplinary graduate school educationalsystem. This programme deals with four major areas:• catastrophic natural hazards and disasters• man-made accidents and disasters• regional environment change and degradation• food security.These challenges of academic research and education,led by DPRI, are intended to involve cooperation onwater-related disaster risk reduction with many overseasor international institutions and organizations,as well as with local communities around the world.We believe that this transdisciplinary approach can bestrongly connected to policy or real-world issues andcontribute to disaster risk reduction for sustainabledevelopment of our Earth system.[ 106 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTThe Regional Centre for Training andWater Studies of Arid and Semi-arid ZonesGamal Shaker, General Manager, Regional Department and Rasha El Gohary, Associate Professor, Development andMonitoring Department, Training and Human Development Sector, Ministry of Water Resources and IrrigationWater resources play a fundamental role in social,economic and environmental development and inensuring national security. The Nile Basin suffersfrom a scarcity of water resources. This is mainly due to its locationin an arid or semi-arid part of the world, along with otherfactors such as population growth, finite freshwater resourcesand an uneven distribution and lack of water managementawareness. All these factors have severe consequences for foodsecurity and desertification in many parts of the region.Participants at one of the RCTWS training courses for Iraqi traineesImage: MWRIThere are calls from across the world for the better development ofnational and regional training programmes and studies on water managementin arid and semi-arid zones. Creating an integrated framework ofcooperation among regional countries in this field is considered one ofthe main challenges at the national and regional levels. Strong supporthas been provided by the Egyptian Government for the establishmentof the Regional Centre for Training and Water Studies of Arid and SemiaridZones (RCTWS). RCTWS is a coordinating and consulting entityemploying the capabilities of universities (such as Cairo University, AinShams University, Zagazig University and Assuit University), researchcentres (such as the National Water Research Centre and its 12 relatedresearch institutes, and the Academy of Science), and other governmentaland non-governmental organizations (NGOs), includingthe International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage,the International Hydrological Programme (IHP), theInstitute for Water Education and New Generation Co., toimplement its activities and programmes. It is responsiblefor water studies and annual plans for training and otherregional scientific meetings. 1The MWRI training centreEgypt is a unique county known for its extraordinarydependence on a single water source – the RiverNile. The Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation(MWRI) carries out the planning, operation, management,monitoring and maintenance of all the country’sirrigation and drainage systems. In recent decades, therapid increase of water demand indicated the criticalimportance of developing a plan for a strong, integratedtraining programme and awareness campaignson water management in arid and semi-arid zones. Itwas important to execute this plan on all levels includingplanning, studying and implementation.The Training and Manpower Development Unit,the organizational predecessor of the MWRI trainingcentre (TC-MWRI), was established in 1982 to addressthese crucial issues. In 1985 it expanded its scope ofservices with assistance provided by the ProfessionalDevelopment component of the Irrigation ManagementSystems Project, which is funded by the United StatesAgency for International Development. The trainingcentre is responsible for developing the skills of MWRIstaff members in accordance with national policies.TC-MWRI provides specialized training to help some6,000 professionals and 80,000 non-professional staffmembers working in the fields of irrigation, drainageand other public works activities to upgrade theirskills and knowledge, leading to improved performance.The training centre also organizes courses, seminarsand conferences for other countries at the regional andinternational levels. The existing TC-MWRI has classrooms,modern laboratories, accommodation buildings,a library, a computer lab, a language lab and other facilities.It serves other governmental and private sectors aswell as MWRI. Three smaller branches are located in theMiddle Delta, Middle Upper Egypt and Upper Egypt.[ 107 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTRCTWS-EgyptThe main objectives of RCTWS-Egypt are:• generating and providing scientific and technical information onarid and semi-arid issues in the region to enable the formulationof sound policies leading to sustainable integrated water resourcesmanagement (IWRM) at the local, national and regional levels• undertaking effective training and capacity building activitiesat institutional and professional levels in the region, as well asawareness-raising activities targeting audiences including thegeneral public• promoting applied skills on water studies, water management,socioeconomic and environmental issues through regionalcooperative arrangements to strengthen local capabilities and involveregional and international institutions in one integrated network• integrating learning and quality network experiences to trainengineers and professional staff on current responsibilities andfuture targets• providing management and training resources for the selfeducationof engineers and graduate staff• upgrading the practical and operational skills and attitudesof individuals and groups of technicians by developingimplemented and technical field training programmes• increasing cooperation among the region and other countries, aswell as capacity building at institutional and professional levels• raising environmental awareness through activities amongvarious audiences including the general public, in order toenhance the sustainable management of water resources.The centre’s main functions are aimed at enabling coordination,cooperation, collaboration and communication among water studiesstakeholders in the region. These include organizing and supportinga regional water studies network for the exchange of scientificand technical capabilities through interactive and creative learningmethods. The centre seeks to develop a strong programme of advisoryservices and information transfer activities, using applied researchfindings for the region’s countries in the field of water managementRaising environmental awareness among beneficiaries: targeting various audiencesis key to the sustainable management of water resourcesImage: MWRIissues. A regional library and media unit for water studiesprovide training programmes and professional and technicalpublications. Updated technical and computerlaboratories equipped with high-quality devices enablethe practical application of learning and promote participants’understanding and capabilities.Annual scientific, technical and practical trainingprogrammes are provided to increase the knowledgeand capabilities of manpower in all targeted countries.The centre promotes the scientific study of issues relatingto water management in the region’s arid and semi-aridzones. It aims to develop and coordinate cooperativeresearch and study activities on these issues, takingadvantage of the region’s installed scientific and professionalcapacity and the relevant IHP networks and NGOs.Knowledge and information transfer events are organized,including international training courses, symposiaand workshops, to engage in awareness-raising activities.TargetsRCTWS-Egypt aims to realize interaction among thepeoples of the Nile Basin countries to provide a mechanismfor fostering peaceful coexistence and avoidingconflicts. It recognizes the importance of finding widerframeworks for dialogue and societal interaction thatextend these beyond official dialogue to reach the elite,the young, societal leaders and the heads of tribes.Various institutions and ministries have contributedto training programmes to ensure the role of civil societyin fostering cooperation and communication. The centrealso aims to contribute to training and awareness-raisingamong clerics and experts who travel to African countriesso that their role can extend to social and culturalresponsibilities beyond their actual jobs.Countries such as Egypt should not only rely on thecivil society institutions of the Nile Basin countries, butshould also interact with the existing African-Egyptianforums and councils and with the Egyptian civil societiesinterested in African affairs. That said, civil society institutionsamong the Nile Basin countries have taken someimportant actions. These include establishing a regionalunion (the Nile Basin Trade Union) that aims to protectand improve the conditions of workers, preserving watersecurity and benefiting from the humanitarian andnational resources in development projects. An internationalforum has also been established for the Nile Basincountries. This is considered a strong network of civilsociety organizations representing the 10 African countriesof the Nile Basin. It seeks to effect a positive changethrough implementing various projects and programmes.RCTWS-Egypt also focuses on following up the NileBasin Initiative (NBI). Among the objectives adoptedin this context is the realization of real and sustainabledevelopment for the NBI. The mechanisms of mutualcooperation among the Nile Basin countries will befostered while paying due attention to the issues of eradicatingpoverty and fostering economic developmentamong those countries. The centre will contribute toNBI-related activities and study the negative and positive[ 108 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTeffects of the projects on the citizens of Nile Basin countries. Nationalforums will be established and evaluated within each state to fosterthe contribution of civil society in the region.Since its declaration in 1999, the NBI has fostered the role ofsociety by increasing people’s awareness of the requirementsfor developing the Nile Basin countries. In this respect, the NileBasin Discourse has been established under the sponsorship of theInternational Union for the Conservation of Nature to encouragepartnership between civil society organizations and governments,especially as regards the NBI. In this context, the National Nile BasinDiscourse Forums have contributed to implementing a set of activitiesin Egypt with a focus on activating dialogue, raising awarenessof the importance of preserving the Nile water, and fostering the roleof civil society in enhancing peace and avoiding conflicts and wars.Stakeholder participationInadequate dissemination of information, along with poor communicationbetween government institutions and non-governmentalstakeholders, is unduly complicating the water distribution processand constraining dialogue on water policies and programmes. Whilethe Government, through MWRI, remains responsible for the deliveryof irrigation water to farmers free of a service charge, farmershave no clear roles and responsibilities for contributing to theplanning and management of the irrigation system. It should eventuallybe possible for many water management issues to be resolveddirectly at the local level between organizations representing waterusers, without much government involvement. 2Public awareness and economic incentivesPublic awareness is weak regarding the current and growing water shortagesand pollution problems facing Egypt. Illegal rice cultivation andunauthorized agricultural expansion and fish farming often are blamedon this poor appreciation of the adverse environmental and social impactsof such actions, but the real problems are related to the economic statusof inhabitants, lack of enforcement of existing regulations and the factthat farmers are simply responding to the economic incentives they face.Effective public awareness necessitates actions that take into accountthe complex interaction between economic status, enforcement of watermanagement regulations and the need for appropriate economic incentivesto affect individual and institutional behaviour. 3MWRI human resources developmentTraining and human resources development constitute animportant dimension of strengthening institutional capacityfor the improved management of MWRI operations.Achieving the objectives of comprehensive human resourcedevelopment is a long-term process, and training is onecomponent of such a comprehensive programme. The mainobjectives of this human resources development are individualgrowth; integrating the objectives of individuals withthose of MWRI; attracting high-calibre employees; increasingthe clarity of career paths for engineers, researchers,specialists and administrators; correlating career prospects,training and individual development; and developingobjective performance appraisal and incentive systems. 4RCTWS achievementsOn a regional level, RCTWS has implemented manyevents though bilateral agreements with the NileBasin countries which were funded by the EgyptianGovernment to support cooperation. In addition, thecentre still participates in activities for the initiation of theGlobal Network – Water and Development Informationfor Arid Lands. It continues to welcome cooperation withother donors in implementing courses for participantsfrom Nile Basin, Middle East and Arab countries.RCTWS has also contributed to events in other countriesin the region, including participation in the GlobalNetwork for Water and Development Information forArid Lands meetings in 2010 and 2011 and the 8thGoverning Board Meeting at the Regional Centre onUrban Water Management in Tehran in 2012. Sidemeetings of the fourth Africa Water Week were heldat RCTWS in May 2012 for the discussion of methodsneeded to support cooperation between Category 2centres. These were attended by the Minister of Waterfor Libya, the United Nations Educational, Scientificand Cultural Organization Officer for Category 2centres in Africa and the Director of the InternationalCenter for Integrated Water Resources Management inthe United States.Image: MWRIParticipants at one of the RCTWS training courses for Nile Basin countries[ 109 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTCourses provided by RCTWS and donors for participants from Nile Basin, Middle East and Arab countries in 2012Course titleEarth and civil constructionsIWRMCheck of lateral instrumentsSoil salinity managementIWRMControl and monitoring of silt in Lake Nasser-NobiaOn-farm water managementARC GISFlash flood managementTwo courses on groundwater and artificial rechargeFinanced byElectricity Company, EgyptNile Sector, EgyptMinistry of Water Resources, IraqInternational Center for AgriculturalResearch in the Dry AreasNile Sector, EgyptNile Sector, EgyptJapan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)JICAJICAParticipants fromSudanDemocratic Republic of the CongoIraqIraqTanzaniaEgypt and SudanNile Basin countriesIraqIraqArab countriesSource: MWRIOn a national level, 361 courses were implemented between2009 and 2011 for participants from MWRI, providing training formore than 2,000 staff per year. In addition, some special courseswere tailored for senior MWRI staff to qualify them in the fields ofEnglish, information technology and management.The 2012-2017 RCTWS strategy was developed in 2011, identifyingthe four main pillars of financial perspective, customerperspective, internal processes and growth and learning. Anorganization chart was developed to fit this strategy. A primarystudy relating to ‘track change training’ was prepared to qualifyMWRI temporary staff. Renovations and improvements werealso carried out in the Kafr Elshiekh, Fayoum, Menia and Esnabranches to upgrade and enhance their capacity to achieve thecentre’s strategyIn January 2007, an agreement was signed between RCTWS andthe German Society for International Cooperation for the initiationEmployees take part in on-the-job training provided by RCTWS to Nile Basin countriesImage: MWRIof an important management programme. Today, fourtrainers who were qualified through this project stilltrain MWRI senior staff and leaders on managementwithin the regular annual plan of the centre.Future strategyThe overall strategy for RCTWS until 2050 is to becomea state-of-the-art learning provider, using advancedtechnologies and a learning process based on the mostrecent research findings in cognitive science. The centreaims to become an outstanding knowledge base andlearning facilitator, capable of providing knowledgeservices in a wide range of technologies to stakeholdersin the Egyptian water sector. It will continue todevelop training courses and other learning activitiesto support MWRI, working closely with subject matterexperts within the ministry and knowledge institutes.The centre will also work to develop the expertise ofpeople within MWRI, enabling a connection betweenlearning and work based on the current and futureneeds of employees.In the future, training should be carried out withina broader framework that includes developing themanagement capacity within ministry departmentsand projects. There is growing recognition thatirrigation technology must also take into accountenvironmental considerations and sociologicalcharacteristics such as farmers’ behaviour. Humanresources development programmes for MWRl shouldalso include training in planning (including corporatestrategy, organization and financial planning); IWRM;participatory irrigation management; environmentalengineering and water quality; public participation indecision-making; leadership and management skills;and information management. 5[ 110 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTSustainable water education as a solutionto global water challengesYoonjin Kim, Project Manager, International Affairs, Korea Water ForumSustainable solutions to the many challenges of waterare achievable. These solutions require a multi-sectorapproach including schools and community-based watereducation to empower the next generation of water leaders andprofessionals. The Korea Water Forum provides water educationwith the goal of building this knowledge and awarenessat a young age, and this approach has been applied with greatsuccess in several regional water education partnerships.Water education to encourage the general public, especiallythe young, to understand the intricacies of today’s water problemswill lead to responsible decision-making in the future. Inaddition, the process of building consensus among young professionalson solutions to water challenges will surely prove apowerful contribution to future water problem solving. Alongsidethis water education for the young, research on water educationwill create knowledge and standards which will satisfy the needsof water-related capacity building in developing countries andthose in transition.As an Asia-Pacific regional water educational channel, theKorea Water Forum has striven to develop national and internationalpublic and expert water education programmesthrough various activities.Asia-Pacific Youth Parliament for WaterThe Korean Government, Korea Water Forum andNational Assembly Environment Forum came togetherto host the Asia-Pacific Youth Parliament for Water(APYPW) in order to develop young water professionalsand drive them to position themselves as futurewater leaders by encouraging active youth participationin global water and environment activities. Anannual regional youth forum consisting of around 100Asia-Pacific youths, the APYPW gathers in Korea everysummer for a week to discuss regional water challengesand the actions they can take to provide solutions. TheKorea Water Forum intends that this representativeyouth initiative in the Asia-Pacific region will bringtogether a diversity of young voices and encouragethem to participate in considering solutions to thewater challenges we are facing today. By taking part inwell organized, verified programmes and activities andImage: Korea Water ForumImage: Korea Water ForumThe APYPW develops young water professionals to position themselves asfuture water leadersAround 100 youths from the Asia-Pacific region gather in Korea everyyear to take part in the APYPW[ 111 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTsimulating congressional action, young delegates of each countrywill gain awareness of global and regional water problems andgrapple with them. In addition, the APYPW will provide the youthswith an opportunity to experience the processes of the 7th WorldWater Forum, to be held in Daegu Gyeongbuk, Korea in 2015.The 100 APYPW youths are selected through an applicationprocess. They then choose their area of interest from a selection ofkey issues on global water challenges such as:• climate change and water storage/disasters• integrated water resources management/ecosystems and rivers• cities and urbanization/sanitation, wastewater and reuse• green growth/science and technology• food and agriculture/energy• right to water and Sanitation/Millennium Development Goals(MDGs) and sustainable development goals (SDGs)• governance/policy, legislation and institution/transboundarycooperation• education and capacity building/culture and indigenoussolutions.Among the participants of the second APYPW, the four mostpopular courses were:1. Climate change and water storage/disasters2. Integrated water resource management/ecosystems and rivers3. Cities and urbanization/sanitation, wastewater and reuse4. Governance/policy, legislation and institution/transboundarycooperation.With their agendas already selected, participants discuss the mainissues during the week of APYPW. They are split up into fourcommissions, each composed of different paired country delegates,to discuss the four issues. In addition to presenting theissues related to the commission theme, delegates present thewater issues of their designated country in pairs. This ensuresthat the process raises awareness of specific regionalissues and that delegates learn how to build consensusin their discussions.The commission sessions include group discussions,lectures by international water experts and field trips atlocal water-related facilities. Delegates learn the processof building consensus and creating their own declarationsas youth parliamentarians representing theirdesignated countries. The sessions enable them to freelyexpress their interests in regional water improvement,and they are given responsibilities for leading follow-upactions when they go back to their countries.Previous participants are already vigorously activein running regular web-based meetings and publishingyouth journals containing the results of their waterdiscussions. In addition, some APYPW delegates willtake part in the 7th World Water Forum in 2015,leading the way in making the voice of youth heardand becoming independent opinion makers on theinternational stage. For example, a speaker from thefirst APYPW has expanded his role and was selectedas one of three youth delegates by the World WaterCouncil in 2012.In two years, APYPW has boosted regional youth incontinuing their follow-up actions. It is expected tofurther expand its scope over the next year, to includecooperation with other international youth activitiesleading up to the World Water Forum in 2015,the target year of the SDG. Mutual cooperation withthe World Youth Parliament for Water (WYPW) andAsian Development Bank (ADB) Youth Forum willclosely link to the activities of the APYPW throughdifferent formats of cooperative work, such as regularImage: Korea Water ForumImage: Korea Water ForumAPYPW country delegates present the water issues of their designated countries andlearn how to build consensusSessions include group discussions where APYPW delegates freelyexpress their interests in regional water improvement[ 112 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImage: Korea Water ForumImage: Korea Water ForumKJWP winners are given the opportunity to be a Korean delegate at theStockholm Junior Water PrizeAround 50 teams compete every year in the KJWP, creating solutionsto resolve global water challengesmeetings among representatives of each activity to draw outlinesfor their next actions.The Korea Water Forum is continuously developing the APYPWprogrammes to make them more helpful in enabling youths to gainthe knowledge and experiences to contribute to better water in thefuture. Harmonious cooperation with international partners onyouth water education is a key focus of these endeavours.Korea Junior Water PrizeThe Korea Junior Water Prize (KJWP) was born in 2009 as anannual national water essay competition co-organized by theKorean Government and the Korea Water Forum. Every yeararound 50 teams compete with their ideas on solutions for waterchallenges. The essays mainly cover unique and creative solutionsfor resolving local or global water challenges. The qualityof resolutions researched by the participants improves every yearand evaluators have a hard time selecting the best ones. Winnersreceive a minister’s award as well as the opportunity to be a Koreandelegate at the Stockholm Junior Water Prize. This gives thema precious chance to discuss common interests and share theirideas and experiences with future water sector leaders duringthe Stockholm World Water Week. KJWP participants also havea close link to participating in the APYPW through the socialnetworks that APYPW parliamentarians have set up as part of theirfollow-up actions.Project Water Education for TeachersAs a close partner organization of the Project Water Education forTeachers (WET) Foundation, the Korea Water Forum carries outregular and irregular water training for teachers with customizedtext and toolkits. The aim of the education is to buildcapacity for sustainable development by disseminatingproper tools for water education and raising publicawareness on water issues so that more people getinvolved in actions to improve water and the waterenvironment. The Korea Water Forum aims to trainmore than 100 facilitators and educators in a year.Co-organizing international water educationIn September 2013, the Korea Water Forum with theKorean Government and the United Nations EnvironmentProgramme (UNEP) Regional Office for Asia-Pacific(ROAP) will work with the Korean Ministry of Environmentand Andong City, Republic of Korea to co-organizeTraining for Trainers. Using the newly introduced UNEP-International Institute for Sustainable DevelopmentEcosystem Management Manual, water experts and publicofficials from different countries in the Asia-Pacific regionwill be trained for local-scale implementation.The cooperation with UNEP ROAP is a trigger forexpanding the scope of the Korea Water Forum’s watereducation, with the goal of finding firm and effective channelsto establish partnerships on regional water education.Youth initiative in the World Water ForumOn the basis of youth activities in the various water educationprogrammes above, the Korea Water Forum and thenational committee for the 7th World Water Forum areseeking to find the right place and time for youth to getinvolved in the processes of the World Water Forum in[ 113 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImage: Korea Water ForumYoung participants of previous water education activities take a leading role in raising awareness on the importance of water education2015. Youth supporters joined in the kick-off meeting held in DaeguGyeongbuk, Korea in May 2013. APYPW parliamentarians, KJWPparticipants and all the youth delegates from our international watereducation partners such as the Project WET Foundation, WYPW,UNEP and the ADB Youth Forum have the capacity to lead the youthmovement through the forum process.The World Water Forum has four main pillars which are: thematic,regional, political and science and technology. Civil activities are alsoconsidered as a main programme. Well-trained youth who are waitingfor their chances to make their voice heard on water will be exposedas more vigorous actors in the biggest international water forum.As a main supporting organization of the national committee forthe 7th World Water Forum, the Korea Water Forum will share itsprecious experiences and knowledge from previous internationalwater forums, including the World Water Forum, Istanbul WorldWater Forum, Stockholm World Water Week, Asia Water Week andSingapore International Water Week. Its aim is to enhance awarenessof the importance of the voice of youth, and of educating them.Our national and international cooperation on water educationwill be sustained as long as there is a potential young voice in theworld. Through our efforts in actively researching and organizingimproved water education programmes, we will continue to developways to educate youth to be future leaders on water.As a North-East Asia regional coordinator to the Asia-Pacific regionalprocess of the 6th World Water Forum, the Korea Water Forumsuggested the target that ‘by 2018, Asia-Pacific countries will havecommitted to establish and manage a training centre for water research,education and education for teachers’. This goal will be continuouslydiscussed at future World Water Forums to determine follow-upactions through cooperative plans with our partners.The Korea Water Forum and our young participants ofprevious water education activities will take a leading rolein disseminating the importance of water education andthe process of raising public awareness through variouschannels, especially in terms of young voices and actions.The 7th World Water ForumThe 7th World Water Forum will take place in DaeguGyeongbuk, Repbulic of Korea, from 12 to 17 April in 2015.The 7th Forum shows a spirit of cooperation withthe water community in order to contribute to a betterfuture for the planet by discovering how to implementdiscussed solutions together and by sharing knowledgeand experience. Implementation, the core value of the7th Forum, will make a link between the solutions andpractical actions.As the 7th Edition of the world’s largest water event isopen to all as a multi-stakeholder platform, it expects theinvolvement of governmental, inter-governmental, scientific,technical, industry, civil society and representatives fromfields such as agriculture, energy, etc. Over 30,000 people willenjoy high-quality sessions, intense debates and informativeworkshops, Water Expo, Water Fair, etc. for six days.The 7th World Water Forum Kick-off meeting took place inSeoul and Daegu, Republic of Korea on 13-15 May, 2013.Around 500 water experts and high-level representatives,including 150 international participants from 41 countries,participated in the official lunch of the 7th Forum, thebeginning of a two-year preparatory process.You can find a Kick-off meeting summary reportand keep up to date with the latest information onthe 7th World Water Forum on its official website:worldwaterforum7.org/en.[ 114 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTLong-term planning investments payingdividends: the Colorado River Basin WaterSupply and Demand StudyCarly Jerla, Co-Study Manager and Ken Nowak, Bureau of Reclamation; Kay Brothers, Co-Study Manager,Southern Nevada Water Authority consultant; Armin Munevar, CH2M Hill; Les Lampe, Black & Veatch;David Groves and Jordan Fischbach, RAND CorporationFlowing more than 2,300 km from source to sea, theColorado River drains a basin of about 637,000 squarekilometres, covering roughly a twelfth of the contiguousUnited States. The watershed includes parts of seven US states(Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah andWyoming) and two states in northern Mexico (Baja Californiaand Sonora).About 40 million people depend on drinking water from theColorado River and its tributaries. Additionally, the river irrigatesnearly 5.5 million acres (2.2. million hectares) of farmland and fuelshydropower facilities that generate more than 4,200 megawatts ofpower. It is the force that carved the Grand Canyon and is the lifebloodfor more than 20 Native American tribes and communities,seven national wildlife refuges, four national recreation areas, andeleven national parks.Because the Colorado supports such diverse resources, managingthe river has become a complex, multi-objective exercise thatinvolves stakeholders and resource management entities such as thefederal Government, Native American tribes and communities, stateagencies, municipalities and agricultural districts, advocacy groups,non-governmental organizations and local governments. It is inevitablethat these interests often are in conflict – managing the riverequitably requires a strong commitment by all parties.Reservoir management largely falls within the purview of theSecretary of the US Department of the Interior, and the Bureauof Reclamation (Reclamation) is the agency designated to act onthe Secretary’s behalf. Reclamation is the largest wholesale watersupplier in the United States, and numerous Reclamation projectsare located in the Colorado River basin, including Glen CanyonDam and Hoover Dam, which are effectively bookends for theGrand Canyon. As the water master for much of the river corridor,Reclamation is charged with advancing sound management of thisessential resource.Broad water conflicts began to emerge in the Colorado River basinin the early 1900s. Over the century that followed, entities associatedwith the river struck numerous compacts, treaties, settlementsand other agreements – some amicably and some through hardfoughtlitigation. Collectively, these comprise the ‘Law of the River’.The core of the Law of the River is a series of apportionments withinthe United States, and between the United States and Mexico, whichdate back over half a century. Unfortunately, theseagreements were based on a limited flow record thatdoes not reflect the river’s long-term average annualyield. As apportionments continued to develop, sizeabledams and their associated reservoirs were constructedalong the river to buffer the significant variability inyear-to-year flow. Since the early 1950s, there have beena number of years when the annual water use in theColorado River basin exceeded the yield; these shortageswere avoided only through the stored water. In thisregard, the Colorado River is unique – the river’s totalstorage capacity is about four times the mean annualnatural yield of the river basin.The Colorado River basinSource: Bureau of Reclamation[ 115 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImage: Lori Warren, Black & VeatchLake Mead, seen from the Hoover Dam – low water levels reveal the ‘bathtub ring’Even with this phenomenal water capacity, the Colorado hasbecome strained in recent decades due to the combined effectof overallocation of water and an unprecedented drought thatcontinues today. With climate change threatening to reduce flowseven further, long-term planning is more important than ever.In response, the US Department of the Interior launched severalprogrammes that focus on climate adaptation and long-term planning,programmes that incorporate forward thinking, collaborationand expanded science to elevate water planning and managementto new – and needed – levels.For these programmes to succeed, benefits from previous investments,buy-in from stakeholders and significant groundwork bythe entities involved are all necessary. Although Reclamation operatesmany of the large water storage and conveyance projects in thewestern United States, the water is apportioned at the state level;hence, involvement from those respective state agency representativesis especially critical. Owing to the complexity and size of thebasin, Reclamation has made investments over recent decades inlong-term planning on the Colorado, both in technical tools andstakeholder relationships. They are the essential foundation forcomprehensive management and long-term planning.Approximately 35 years ago, Reclamation began developing acomputer model of the Colorado River basin, the Colorado RiverSimulation System (CRSS), to address the many ‘what if’ questionsarising from proposed development or changes in river operations.For roughly the first 20 years of its existence, the model usedFORTRAN programming language. Over time, it evolved in sizeand complexity, growing to tens of thousands of lines of code and acommensurate associated data.In the mid 1990s, the model was implemented in the RiverWare TMmodelling platform to better accommodate the intricacies of theColorado River system and promote stakeholder access. Developedat the University of Colorado’s Center for Advanced DecisionSupport for Water and Environmental Systems and in conjunctionwith Reclamation, the Tennessee Valley Authority andthe US Army Corps of Engineers, the software employsa ‘click and drag’ graphical user interface that greatlyimproves usability. Moving to an alternative platformwas a sizeable task requiring considerable commitmentto redevelop a model that exactly reproducedthe FORTRAN results. Ultimately, this investment ledto a significant expansion of CRSS use, both withinReclamation and with stakeholders. The new modelalso enables the incorporation of new operationalpolices, increased detail and new model needs, all withrelative ease.Commensurate with the commitment to long-termplanning tools and capabilities is the commitment tostrong relationships within Reclamation and otherfederal agencies, and across the broad range of state,local and non-government stakeholder groups.Acceptance of a common modelling platform andregular discussion has helped foster mutual trust amongthe players involved in managing – and using – theriver’s resources, evident through numerous successfulundertakings in recent decades. These collaborativeefforts have received high praise in the past severalyears, twice culminating in the US Department of theInterior’s Partners in Conservation Award. Given potentialpitfalls, varying objectives and the ever-changingdynamic of the Colorado River basin, maintaining existingpartnerships and cultivating new ones continues tobe a high priority for Reclamation.Under the auspices of the US Department of theInterior’s WaterSMART programme, Reclamation andthe seven US basin states commenced the ColoradoRiver Basin Water Supply and Demand Study in 2010in collaboration with a broad range of stakeholders[ 116 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImage: Lori Warren, Black & VeatchThe Colorado River is the force that carved the Grand Canyon and the lifeblood for communities, wildlife and recreation areasthroughout the basin. The study aimed to identify potential supplyand demand imbalances facing the Colorado River basin within theUnited States over the next 50 years, and to explore options andstrategies for resolving those imbalances. The study is the mostcomprehensive effort of its type to date and was designed aroundfour major components: future supply (hydrologic conditions),future demand, evaluation of options and strategies, and vulnerabilityanalysis.Given the size of this undertaking, a consultant team that includedprivate sector firms CH2M Hill, Black & Veatch and the RANDCorporation assisted throughout the three-year effort, providingtechnical expertise, analysis and report production. Stakeholder relationshipsand technical tools were critical to the study’s success. Formany of the study facets, multi-stakeholder work groups convenedto develop consensus on complex topics. Incorporating major viewpointsfrom various stakeholders resulted in creative alternatives,which benefited the study overall.The first phases of the study were water supply and demandassessment. A scenario planning approach was employed to considerthe full range of possible futures, rather than just attempting todetermine what was most likely to occur. This produced severalscenarios for both supply and demand. When coupled, the variouscombinations of supply and demand scenarios represent a broadrange of possible futures.Ultimately, four supply scenarios were agreed on. Thescenarios reflect hydrologic conditions based on:• paleo reconstructed (tree-ring) streamflow• gauge flow from the last century• a hybrid of reconstructed and gauge flow• modelled future conditions using data from climatemodel projections.Each scenario has unique characteristics regardingmean flow, variability and drought (surplus) magnitudeand persistence. Although stakeholders were familiarwith several of the scenarios from previous processes,care was taken to dedicate sufficient time to introduceand explain new hydrology data and methods. Thishelped build stakeholder confidence before proceedingwith other study phases. Stakeholder interest andinvestment in understanding these new approacheswere equally important to this process.Demand scenarios were rooted in a storyline developmentapproach. Collectively, through discussions,narratives of possible future demand conditions werecrafted, considering factors such as the economy, populationgrowth and location, environmental awarenessand agricultural practices. Appropriate stakeholders then[ 117 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImage: Bureau of ReclamationColorado River Basin Study collaborators receive the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Partners in Conservation Award in 2012quantified demands numerically by region and use type to follow thenarrative. In total, six demand scenarios were quantified. By the endof the study period, without action, the imbalances between waterdemand and supply have the potential to be quite large.The next phase of the study involved a public solicitation ofoptions and strategies to resolve the imbalances resulting from thesupply and demand scenarios. Through regular outreach efforts thatincluded a website, an e-mail list and routine webinar updates, thepublic and other groups not directly involved were kept apprised ofthe study progress. By the options and strategies phase, the e-maildistribution list was more than 800 addresses long. This list wasused to publicize the open solicitation and further affirmed the benefitsof outreach beyond major stakeholders. Through this process,more than 150 submissions were received, ranging from augmentationto water conservation to alternative management approaches.The submitted options were grouped, standardized where appropriate,and rated on factors such as cost, reliability and energy needs tofacilitate inter-comparison.In the final study phase – the vulnerability analysis – the CRSSmodel was used to evaluate the potential vulnerability of six resourcecategories: water deliveries, hydropower, recreation, ecologicalresources, water quality and flood control. Metrics to evaluate theseresources and associated thresholds for vulnerability were developedby seeking input from relevant stakeholders and field experts. Theassessment considered all future supply and demand combinations,first without options and then against several ‘option portfolios’. Theseportfolios represent different strategies (for example, low energy footprint)by including only options that meet certain rating criteria. Fourdistinct strategies were developed through an iterative process involvingstudy partners and stakeholders to facilitate an exploration oftrade-offs, rather than attempting to prescribe a solution.In short, the study found that in the absence of timely action toensure sustainability in the basin, there is a strong risk of shortagesin the coming decades. All of the option portfolios consideredreduced vulnerability across the six resource categories whilehelping to close the supply and demand gap. However, vulnerabilitieswere never eradicated and in some cases persisted strongly.Thus, the study sheds light on the benefits of coordinated,preventative strategies that have multi-resourcebenefits while also opening the question of acceptablelevels of risk and risk management.Following completion of the study in late 2012,Reclamation hosted a final public webinar on theInternet that drew more than 200 participants forthe approximately two-hour event. In response tostrong interest and desire for additional detail, apublic outreach effort followed. This consisted of twoworkshops in major population centres in the basin,and another webinar. All were open to the public andlasted around four hours between presentations andquestions. Despite the length and highly technicalnature of these workshops, participation numbered inthe hundreds.Recognizing the need to build on this interest andcollectively move forward, a ‘next steps’ phase has beenlaunched. Specifically, several work groups have beenchartered to advance strategies found to be cost-effectiveand provide a wide range of benefits to all waterusers. The next steps of the study aim to advance theexisting technical foundation while maintaining thesame broad, inclusive stakeholder process employedthroughout the previous three years.For the Colorado River basin, successes such asthis recent study are not possible overnight. Time andcommitment are necessary to forge the relationshipsand tools to tackle challenging issues in a complexriver basin. Tools and technical capability can quicklybecome obsolete as science and methods evolve.Stakeholder groups and staff also change, which impactsrelationships formed over time. Continued discussionand continued activity, through periods of abundantflows and periods of drought, are essential to safeguardthe future of communities, economies and ecosystemssupported by the Colorado River.[ 118 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTHidroEX International Centre – an exampleof water cooperationTânia Brito, Director of Research, Richard Meganck, Romes Lopes, HidroEX International CentreAlthough considered a common heritage of mankind, anessential element for life, water resources have beenunder increasing pressure as a result of both misuseand mismanagement. This reality is the underlying reason forthe establishment of the International Centre for Education,Capacity-Building and Applied Research in Water (HidroEX). 1Its mission is to contribute to resolving the burgeoning watercrises that threaten the world as a whole, with a special focuson Latin America and Portuguese-speaking Africa. By helpingto train the next generation of water leaders, the foundationlooks towards a time when water resources will be shared in anequitable fashion and managed in a sustainable context.HidroEX International Centre is a public law foundation created bythe Government of Minas Gerais, in partnership with The FederalGovernment of Brazil, and it is subordinate to the Secretary forScience, Technology and Higher Education. Established under theauspices of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO), the HidroEX International Centre has theresponsibility for implementing sustainable development programmesfocusing on water preservation and management of waterresources through educational, research and capacitybuilding initiatives. HidroEX is one of UNESCO’sCategory II centres which understands that encouragingthe operation of water education centres in a networkis as important as establishing the centres. Networkedoperation will enable the centres to avoid the overlap ofefforts, leading to greater economy of scale and technicaland economic efficiency in implementing water-relatedprojects. Defending this position, HidroEX has initiateda number of national and international partnershipscommitted to networking in a great effort towards watereducation, in accordance with the guidelines establishedin the International Hydrological Programme (IHP).Following UNESCO’s recommendation, a keyresponsibility of HidroEX is to foster internationalwater cooperation with Latin American andPortuguese-speaking African countries, working inclose relationship with the Community of PortugueseSpeaking Countries (CPLP).Images: Tânia Brito (left); Maria Carolina Hazin (right)Everyone is responsible for sustainable water use and the learning process starts in schools, homes, communities and basins[ 119 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTInternational cooperation on water educationChanges to attitudes and habits, and reaching the collective subconsciousin the defence of sustainable development, must begin with the educationof children and young people. HidroEX tries to operate in the formaleducation settings of elementary schools, in partnership with the publiceducational system, as well as in informal education to create socialawareness. This is an open and innovative pedagogical process that notonly diffuses knowledge but also seeks to sensitize various public audiences.It unfolds an educational process that is connected to the everydayreality of the student with the understanding that we are all responsiblefor the sustainable use of water, and that the learning process starts atschool, at home, in the community and in the basins where we live.Water Education – from an interdisciplinary perspective‘Water Education – from an interdisciplinary perspective’ is an environmentaleducation project focused on water, which was conceivedaccording to the IHP instructions and guidelines. The target audiencecomprises students (6-11 years old) and teachers (first to fifthgrades) from elementary school.The project is based on the need to find viable alternatives for therational use of water and is underpinned by cognitive theories andthe four pillars of education – learning to know; learning to do;learning to live together; and learning to be – described in Learning:The Treasure Within, the report to UNESCO of the InternationalCommission on Education for the Twenty-First Century. Thesetheories hold that education is the only instrument capable of raisingawareness and instructing citizens towards a more qualitative, fairand democratic society.The project is an ongoing process that combines work philosophyand the creation of new learning spaces. It includes and integratesthe environmental theme into the curricular and extracurricularactivities of educational institutions through educational actions andpractices aimed at sensitizing, organizing, mobilizing and involv-ing the school communities. This makes the project aninterdisciplinary one.The goals of the project are:• promoting environmental education focused on waterresources, hereafter referred to as water education –one of the reasons for HidroEX being established• contributing to a transdisciplinary approach in theenvironmental content to be developed, so it can beexplored as a transversal theme cutting across thetraditional disciplines taught in elementary schools• disseminating information and knowledge about theuse, preservation, conservation and protection ofwater resources• turning school communities into a space wherewater education can become a social practice.The Sister Schools ProgramThe Sister Schools Program is aimed at strengtheningties between Portuguese-speaking countries so thatenvironmental experiences, especially those with afocus on water, may be interchanged. It includes a set ofpredefined actions seeking to develop mutual cooperationfor the implementation of environmental educationfocused on water within the school community.The ‘My World through Your World EnvironmentalFair’ is part of the programme and is intended toestablish close liaison between school communitiesfrom CPLP countries, so they can exchange practicalenvironmental experiences through information andcommunication technologies. The purpose is to disseminateexperiences, practices, knowledge and culture fora better understanding of environmental issues fromstudents’ perspectives in CPLP countries.Images: Tânia BritoStudents in the Sister Schools Program exchange information and experiences on the use of water resources in their communities[ 120 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTThe Water for Life programme helps communities rediscover their history andidentify good practices for sustainable development and conservationIn addition to regular contact by videoconference, studentsexchange environmental information related to the use of waterresources in their communities through letters and pictures on thesubject of ‘water in my life’.In its first phase of implementation, the programme is limited toschool communities in two cities: Frutal, Minas Gerais, Brazil whichhosts the City of Waters, where the Water Education programmeis consolidated, and Praia, Cape Verde, as it is the capital of CapeVerde, a Portuguese-speaking country in Africa chosen as pilot forthe programme outside Brazil.Water for LifeThe Water for Life programme is based on the principles and tenets ofsustainability. Its purpose is to restore the balance between developmentand the improvement of living standards of the population onone hand, and conservation of natural water resources on the other.Bearing in mind the multifarious nature of this issue and seeking toadopt a holistic approach, the programme is founded on five pillars ofsustainability: environmental, social, economic, cultural and urban.The river basin has been chosen as the unit of coverage for theprogramme because it is the locus in which all the components ofgrowth, development and maintenance of society are interdependent.The river basin exhibits synergistic interaction between the elementsof water, soil, flora, fauna and human beings – for better or worse.The Water for Life programme aims, therefore, at building amodel for sustainable management of river basins which is comprehensive,inclusive and participatory – a tool that should allow anunderstanding of the social-environmental reality of a region, itsproblems and conflicts, potentialities and challenges; and enablethe creation of a framework of solutions to restore the conditions ofenvironmental equilibrium and social well-being.Image: Tânia BritoThis proposal of a model for sustainable managementof water resources, however, has been designedby the HidroEX International Centre with a particularapproach, as it is centred in the local history and cultureitself. It has taken into account that it is only possibleto protect and take care of what you know. Therefore,instead of offering established projects or standardizedmodels, the community is invited to rediscover its ownhistory and raise good practices and popular lore, whichmay have been long forgotten.Once this agenda of historical investigation of thetown and its surroundings has been implemented, anew reality arises from a better understanding of therelationship between nature – especially water – andsociety. In this way, the citizen discovers him or herselfas an essential agent, capable of creating and changingthe social development.Most of all, the programme has worked to builda model of sustainable life, fostering changes fromharmful behaviour into healthy attitudes througheveryday actions taken up – not imposed – by thepopulation itself. This process defines pro-active environmentaleducation, which consists in leading humanbeings to understand the systemic functioning of theirspace and to develop an integrated vision of life.Underpinned by the new scientific and technical knowledgeacquired by the programme, the educational andcultural work gains importance in fostering actions thatapproach scientific knowledge in the daily lives of inhabitants,showing the commitment of the proposal to a visionthat connects science to popular lore and customs – a safeway to face those challenges arising from the need to builda society model based on sustainability.The actions which have been undertaken within theWater for Life programme are:• recovery and long-term conservation of soils andwater resources• forest recovery in Permanent Preservation Areas,Legal Reserves and ecological corridors• undertaking of an agroecological zoningplanning process• development of a forest inventory of the watershed• quantification and description of forest fragmentsand establishment of a genetic conservation system• preparation of a detailed description of riverenvironmentsand inventory of aquatic biodiversity• identification of alternatives to incentives andpayment for environmental services• development of work towards sustainable urbanwater management on a number of fronts• mapping of waterborne diseases• development of the study The Impact of Educationon Water Management• recovery of the history and culture of water inthe region• sensitizing, raising awareness, mobilizing andorganizing the local community to the overall longtermgoals of the project.[ 121 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTCity of Waters – a venue for water cooperationSharing synergy, common interests and infrastructure with severalwater research institutions are some of the objectives of a pioneerproject named City of Waters. In the Brazilian city of Frutal, inthe State of Minas Gerais, universities and research institutions areestablishing a centre for advanced studies in water preservationand sustainable management of water resources. The project is alsocommitted to education at all levels and the formation of a newgeneration of leaders for sustainable development.The Water CondominiumOne of the main objectives of the eighth phase of the IHP (IHP VIII) 2is to put science into action. This is achieved by promoting theprocess of transforming information and experience into answeringlocal and regional needs for tools to adapt integrated water resourcesmanagement to global changes, and building competences to meet thechallenges of today’s global water challenges. To this end, it is essentialto establish knowledge platforms where stakeholders, researchers,local institutions, policymakers and education entities can exchangeand share information, communicate with each other and developnew ideas in support of policymaking and decision processes. Inthis context, a Thematic Condominium on Water joining 16 highereducation and research institutions (so far) around an anchor entity– the HidroEX International Centre – was created to face the challengeof bringing together different fields of knowledge and enhanceexisting skills on water issues. The partner research and higher educationinstitutions are: HidroEX; Minas Gerais Federal University;Ouro Preto Federal University; the State University of Minas Gerais;Uberlândia Federal University; Triângulo Mineiro Federal University;Lavras Federal University; Alfenas Federal University; Viçosa FederalUniversity; Itajubá Federal University; Cousteau Society; the PontificalCatholic University of Minas Gerais; São João Del Rey FederalUniversity; Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri Federal University;Minas Gerais Technological Center Foundation; Brazilian NationalWater Agency and Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation.The Water Condominium provides offices, laboratories, library andsupport services to scientists sharing a research interest in a commontheme of importance. It involves 10 thematic cores – water governanceand management; hydrogeology; ecohydrology; environmentalhydrology; water and agriculture; water and energy; environmentaltechnologies; geomatics; water and education; and water historyand culture. The idea is to offer a synergistic environment in whichscientists can exchange ideas and field test such concepts. Scientistsare resident in Brazil for indeterminate periods and share the resultsof their research on common themes with colleague scientists fromaround the world. The project’s outputs aim to expand a holisticapproach to water governance and management by balancing competingdemands from diverse interests such as agricultural, industrial,domestic and environmental stakeholders within the context ofclimate change, population growth and other realities confrontinghuman progress. The goal is to help member states adapt new strategiesthat will make both their ecosystems and socioeconomic systemsmore resilient to such changes and offer decision makers clear indicationsof the implications of decision they are confronting.Communication between scientists and stakeholders is an importantstep towards the development of community understandingand ownership of risk. Scientists have a responsibility to educate thecommunity they serve regarding the risks facing that community,and possible actions the community can take to reduce those risks.A simple schematization of the process of puttingscience into action can be seen as the interaction ofscience and society as presented in IHP VIII. Sciencedeals with the water-related issues of the IHP VIIIthemes and produces reports, review papers andtraining. Society – which consists of professionalsand researchers dealing with climate-related issues,policymakers and the general public – promotes theconnection of people that is facilitated by the organizationof workshops, conferences and networkingthat use social learning. Such opportunities andconnections are crucial to incubate the trust of citizensand policymakers in water professionals, whichis indispensable if the knowledge and informationprovided by these professionals is to be utilized effectivelyin society.In such a scheme, the bulk of the process is representedby the intermediate level: the ‘society- scienceinterface’, which will function as an interface betweensociety and science by producing databases, toolboxes,guidance documents and knowledge platforms.These and other similar complex issues are part of theresearch agenda of HidroEX as an excellent centre inwater, under the auspices of UNESCO.The interaction of science and society as presentedin IHP VIIIScienceSynthesis of experiencesWater quality/scarcityWater related disastersHuman settlementsGroundwaterEcohydrologyReportsPapersTrainingSociety-Science interfaceDatabasesToolboxesGuidance documentsKnowledge platformsSocietyConnecting peopleWorkshopsConferencingNetworkingMobile phonesRadioProfessionalsResearchersPolicymakersGeneral publicSource: HidroEX International Centre[ 122 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTApplication of water directivesin small settlementsProfessor Jovan Despotovic, University of Belgrade Faculty of Civil Engineering and Serbian National Committeefor the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization International Hydrological Programme;and Ljiljana Jankovic, CEng, University of Belgrade Faculty of Civil EngineeringRecent trends in setting national regulations for themanagement of water resources are related to theharmonization of national regulation with the WaterFramework Directive (WFD) and other sister regulations, suchis the Floods Directive and Renewable Energy Directive, 1 andtheir implementation in everyday practice. These EuropeanUnion (EU) regulations cover all aspects of water resources,including rivers, lakes, groundwater and transitional (estuarine)and coastal waters. The objectives of the regulationsinclude the attainment of ‘good’ status in water bodies and,where that status already exists, ensuring that it is retained orsurpassed. All inland and coastal waters must achieve ‘good’status by 2015, and environmental objectives and ecologicaltargets must be defined with the aim of fulfilling this goal. Asa result of environmental, economic and social considerations,water environments will be able to support health and wellbeingfor future generations.River basins present major units for implementation of theWFD. Implementation of the WFD in this context actuallystarts in the biggest river basin districts such as the Rhine,Elba, Po, Seine, Danube, Sava, Hernad, Drina and otherrivers aiming at global solutions embracing vast preliminaryvisions, measures and ultimate solutions.Following the assessment of ecological status andpotential, including analysis of pressures and impacts,definition of heavily modified water bodies and others,comprehensive plans for the monitoring of surface andgroundwater are prepared that will lead to the achievementand preservation of satisfactory ecological status.Taking into account that many river basins belong tomore than one country, transboundary issues presentimportant topics for discussions and for the adoption ofcommon policy based on EU regulations that will leadto mutual approval and support.Image: Nenad Jacimovic, 2007River Zasavica in Srem, Serbia. River basins present major units for implementation of the WFD[ 123 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTVia MilitarisSerbia’s Via Militaris is the focus of a project to connect archaeological andhistorical heritage with water resourcesSource: Faculty of Civil Engineering, BelgradeEcological status in river basins depends on population occupanciesand the human activities practiced. Urban areas and industrial centresalter natural conditions in the basins and could put extensive pressureon the environment. Urbanization is an emerging process induced bymany causes such as job opportunities, young people seeking education,social status, medical security and cultural facilities. Due to theoccupancies of large areas with urban amenities, more farmland andwildlife habitats are displaced by impervious surfaces. At the sametime, increases in pollution sources such as soot, industrial fumes andmotor vehicle exhaust gases directly impact all environmental aspects,such as water and air pollution, the water cycle, flora and fauna.Current knowledge and practice is mainly implementedin large urban areas where educated people liveand access to information is easy. Even in large citieswhere urban sprawl occurs, especially during turbulenttimes when uncontrolled urbanization phenomenatake place, a lack of proper planning and constructionof infrastructure systems – particularly sanitation –means that the implementation of regulations related towater leaves a lot to be desired. The Urban Waste WaterTreatment Directive 2 has been implemented despitedifficulties due to economy problems, underbuilt waterand sewage systems and especially a complete lack ofwastewater treatment plants.On the other hand, vast populations live in rural areasor small towns where procedures and standards appliedin everyday practice belong to traditional ways of livingrather than to up-to-date accomplishments and regulations.If we take for an example the situation in Serbia,more than 95 per cent of water professionals live in fivelarge cities – Belgrade, Nis, Novi Sad, Kragujevac andSubotica – according to data from the Serbian Chamberof Engineers. Governmental and intergovernmental institutionsand projects should foster a policy of permanenteducation, employment opportunities and technicalimprovement in less developed regions in order to createthe conditions for environment preservation.European directives are quite restrictive in termsof further development that would be of benefit forthe environment. In that regard, the implementationof directives should be extended to sustainable use ofwater through irrigation, energy production and navigation,but also through recreational use of water such aswater sports, boating and so on.Image: Tamara Jankovic, 2012The River Temska (left) and Stara Mountain (right) in Eastern Serbia are areas with abundant water resources, flora and fauna[ 124 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImage: aeternitas-numismatics.blogspot.comBorder areas in North-West and South-East Serbia are rich in historical heritage from the Roman EmpireAs an extension of this idea, the project for the connection ofarchaeological and historical heritage with water resources alongthe Roman Via Militaris in Serbia was launched in 2012. Theproject is based on strengthening the network of countries thatshare common natural and historical sites located in boundaryregions – the first at the boundary region of South-East Serbiaand the second in North-West Serbia. The South-East Serbia regioncovers the Vlasina area and Bela Palanka in Serbia, Kunstendilin South-West Bulgaria and Macedonia. The North-West regionincludes Western Serbia (Srem), East Croatia, the East Republicof Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina (Semberija).Border areas located in North-West and South-East Serbia are richwith natural resources and cultural-historical heritage, and presentexceptional potential for transboundary cooperation in variousareas such as environmental protection and tourism. Catchmentsof the rivers Sava, Bosut and Studva in the west and Nisava, Pcinjaand Dragovistica in the east are characterized with abundantwater resources, flora and fauna, and certain areas are declared asprotected areas by international associations for nature protection.The River Zasavica is located in Srem and is a habitat for about 700plant species, 187 bird species and 24 fish species, some of whichare endemic to the area. Obedska bara on a left bank of the Savariver is an oasis for important ecosystems including bird fauna with220 species.In addition, historical heritage found in these areas originatesback to the Neolithic period, with most of the finds coming fromthe Roman Empire. At the time of the Roman Empire, Fruska Gorabecame a border area where Sirmium (today Sremska Mitrovica) wasdeveloped. Seven Roman emperors were born in Sirmium, and thisis the beginning of the so-called settlement itinerarium RomanumSerbia which links significant sites of the ancient Roman periodand four settlements (Sirmium, Singidunum, Felix Romuliana andNaisus Belkin) in the territory of Serbia, including the birthplacesof 17 Roman emperors.This combination of natural resources and culturalhistoricalheritage is an excellent base for thedevelopment of tourism and other commercial fields.The aim of this project is to stimulate new researchand cooperation among different scientific fields thatwill give direction for the research of interdependencebetween natural resources and rich historical heritage.In this regard, there is a strong need for networking atall levels of education, from an elementary level throughuniversity education and research. Education in the waterresources and environment domain consists of the implementationof information and knowledge in achievingrequirements which are defined and set within regulatoryand legal documentation at numerous levels. Theseinclude the International Hydrological Programme (IHP),the United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO), the EU, the InternationalCommission for the Protection of the Danube River, theInternational Sava River Basin Commission or any otherinternationally recognized level, such as transborder watershedor basin level, regional level, state level or lesser areas.Recognized institutions that promote an integratedsystem of research and training and foster transboundarycooperation in the region include the InternationalResearch and Training Centre for Urban Drainage (underUNESCO auspices), the UNESCO Chair in Water forEcologically Sustainable Development at the Universityof Belgrade, the Serbian National IHP Committee andthe Black Sea Universities Network among others. TheChair in Water for Ecologically Sustainable Developmentpromotes an integrated system of research, training,information and documentation on sustanable waterresources management, hydro-informatics and ecohydrologyin Central Asia and Africa.[ 125 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTFrom China to Uganda: educating andempowering people to take actionDennis Nelson, President and CEO; John Etgen, Senior Vice President;Nicole Rosenleaf Ritter, Communications Manager, Project WET FoundationIn Entebbe, Uganda, it started with one teacher. Fed upwith the toll that waterborne diseases were taking on hispupils and the school at large, Lake Victoria Primary Schoolteacher Aggrey Oluka jumped at the chance to participate in thedevelopment of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) educationmaterials that could improve his students’ health.At a workshop in Uganda’s second largest city Jinja, Oluka andother educators worked with the Project Water Education forTeachers (WET) Foundation to develop WASH education materialsto use across six African countries. While he expected to lendhis expertise to creating locally relevant materials that wouldappeal to students and teachers around Africa, Oluka couldn’thave known the impact his participation would have on hiscommunity and the wider world. The successful implementationof the materials he helped create would ultimately lead tosafer water resources, increased water source protection and evenimprovement in Lake Victoria Primary School’s bottom line. Theexperiences of Oluka and Lake Victoria Primary School showhow cooperation on WASH education can lead to significantinstitutional development – and demonstrate thepotential of scaling up water education.Aggrey Oluka had seen waterborne diseases devastateLake Victoria Primary School. Enrolment at the 2,000-pupil school plummeted to 400 during one choleraepidemic, and even when cholera was not present, typhoidand other diarrhoeal diseases were. His pupils often missedschool or had to leave class to visit the school health clinicwhen they felt sick. As a science teacher, he knew thatwaterborne illnesses can often be prevented, but there wasno programme in place to teach children – or even trainteachers – to protect themselves.Around the same time, the United States Agencyfor International Development (USAID) had noticed asimilar lack of WASH education resources for Africa.Formal water education was virtually non-existentand the lack of a systematic programme meant thatpreventable waterborne diseases continued to proliferateunchecked. Measures that can reduce diseasetransmission – hand washing, boiling water and waterChildren at Lake Victoria School in Uganda play a game that teaches them how to avoid catching common waterborne diseases[ 126 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTsource protection, for example – had not been introduced in ameaningful way.To address the gap, USAID first considered several existing bookson water, sanitation, hygiene and health, but felt that they lacked thenecessary relevance to children, teachers and communities in Africa.USAID then decided to work with the Project WET Foundation todevelop, publish and distribute a new set of Africa-specific, childfriendlyWASH education materials. A US non-profit organizationwith decades of experience creating resources and training educatorsto help people of all ages understand complicated water topics,Project WET knew the potential of water education to change livesand build local capacity.Since 1984, Project WET has dedicated itself to the mission ofreaching children, parents, teachers and community members of theworld with water education by publishing water resource materialsin several languages, providing training workshops, building expertand educator networks and empowering individuals to take meaningfulaction to address water issues. The cornerstone of Project WET’smethodology is teaching about water resources through handson,investigative, easy-to-use activities and empowering change byoffering opportunities for participants to effect positive change incommunities. The system works because it motivates children andadults alike to learn using Project WET’s interactive, multi-sensory,adaptable, relevant and scientifically-accurate materials.To kick off the new WASH programme, Project WET planned aweek-long workshop in Uganda, along the shores of Lake Victoria.The workshop convened 64 curriculum experts and teachers –including Oluka – from countries throughout East Africa to devisea comprehensive programme for teaching African children aboutwater. Feedback from this workshop assisted in developing andrefining the materials for cultural appropriateness, effectiveness andbreadth of applicability.In cooperation with these important local partners, ProjectWET fleshed out the content for an original educators’ guide andWater education in Latin AmericaBuilding on the success of Project WET interventions inAfrica, UN Habitat asked Project WET to create a similarprogramme using a human values-based approach towater, sanitation and hygiene education (HVWSHE) infive countries in Latin America and the Caribbean –Bolivia, Colombia, El Salvador, Mexico and Peru. Thematerials were customized for local audiences throughon-the-ground workshops and translated into differentSpanish-language versions. A train-the-trainer modelwas used to implement the programme, which hasreached nearly 3,000 teachers and 100,000 studentsthroughout the five countries.Evaluation results showed that 93 per cent ofteachers surveyed who used the educational materialsreported seeing positive changes in student behaviour,including practising better hygiene habits, conservingwater, understanding water resources and instillingstronger values such as responsibility, compassion andcare for the environment.Project funding also provided for small demonstrationprojects to show the potential of using water educationto empower meaningful local action. Using a SpanishlanguageInternet educators’ portal created as part ofthe project, regional teachers submitted applicationsto carry out action projects. Two projects were chosen:one in Bolivia and one in El Salvador.In the Andean Plateau region of Bolivia, Project WETsupported the construction of new sanitation facilitiesfor young children in the small city of Patacamaya.Part of a larger hygiene improvement projectundertaken by Plan International, the new facilitiesinclude separate boys’ and girls’ toilets, as well asnew hand-washing stations.In Apopa, El Salvador, the Santa Carlota 1 Schoolpartnered with Adesco and UN Habitat to use theProject WET demonstration funds to construct a new,more sanitary kitchen, pave their schoolyard and installa new water tank. They also upgraded hand-washingfacilities and provided drinking water stations forstudents in their classrooms.Images: Project WET FoundationUsing the ‘Incredible Journey’ activity, children at Lake Victoria School learnabout the water cycleA teacher in El Salvador wrote a grant to upgrade these hand-washingfacilities to make them more sanitary[ 127 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTAt a workshop in Uganda, teachers find out how to incorporate highly interactive pedagogical methods to teach about water resourcescompanion student activity book on water, health, sanitation anddisease prevention, as well as water cycle and watershed posters andcompanion student activity books. The materials would be distributedthrough a train-the-trainer process, with Project WET workingwith core groups of local education leaders in Northern Uganda,Rwanda and Tanzania, not only to use the new resources but alsoto help their fellow teachers implement the programme.Keenly interested in getting the new resources to his colleaguesand to the pupils at Lake Victoria Primary School, Oluka waitedfor the materials to be finished and implemented them swiftly oncehe had them in hand. Focusing first on the biggest problem – theunchecked spread of waterborne diseases – Oluka and his fellowteachers worked to improve children’s water use habits, stressinghand washing, water purification and water source protection.According to Oluka, things started to change for the better.“The efforts of Project WET in my school have been realized fromthe change of behaviour in the pupils’ use of water, which wasn’t thecase previously,” Oluka said. “This has led to the reduction of so manywaterborne diseases, especially diarrhoea and typhoid, and it has alsochanged the hygiene of the pupils and the sanitation of the school.With students’ health improving, Oluka felt ready to move beyondthe classroom to empower students to make meaningful changes intheir school and community. One of the main areas of difficulty wasthe amount of water available to the school: now that the studentsknew the importance of hand washing with soap, they needed moresafe water with which to do it. Unfortunately, the school’s water billwas already more than US$600 a month, a huge sum in a countrywhere the World Bank estimates the annual per capita gross nationalincome is just US$1,310.Working with students from his classroom and inafter-school clubs, Oluka asked Lake Victoria PrimarySchool leaders if they could set up a rainwater harvestingsystem using a 10,000-litre water tank that hadbeen left idle. Oluka and his students were grantedpermission and set up the system with help from thecommunity. The school’s available water increasedsubstantially, even as their water bill dropped dramatically,to around US$30 a month.And Oluka and his students did not stop there.After learning about the impact of improperly disposedtrash on water resources in their Project WET lessons,the students launched a campus-wide clean-up, whichled to a paper recycling programme when they noticedthat much of what they were collecting was waste paper.They then used the paper to make cardboard pieces fromwhich they could hang teaching materials.“The impact of this is that there is reduction incompound littering. We are also able to sell some ofthis cardboard we produce to sustain our project,”Oluka explained.Increased enrolment (and an increase in the number ofteachers), ready access to boiled water for safe consumption,multiple hand-washing stations and higher scoreson the Ugandan National Exams are additional positivechanges documented at Lake Victoria School throughfollow-up interviews with students and teachers. 1The results have made Aggrey Oluka a strong advocatefor water education after seeing its potential to[ 128 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImages: Project WET FoundationStudents in China play a game called ‘Blue Planet’ to learn how much water covers EarthAggrey Oluka with some of the waste collected by students for recyclingimprove schools and communities. Inspired by his experiences,he has even enrolled in a degree programme in Environment andNatural Resource Management.After winning a 2010 African Ministers’ Council on WaterAfricaSan Award in recognition of his outstanding work at LakeVictoria School and beyond through the scaling up of the WASHprogramme he helped develop, Oluka said: “I call upon theGovernment of Uganda and other governments in Africa to alsoinclude water education in school curricula at all levels so as tomake our pupils have positive behavioural change towards sanitation,hygiene and sustainable usage of water.”In many ways, his call has been heeded, and not just in Africawhere the USAID-Project WET WASH programme has ultimatelyreached tens of thousands of teachers and millions of studentsin 21 countries. UN Habitat has sponsored an adaptation of theprogramme in five Latin American countries, as well as in India, andother partners have extended the scope to include Brazil, Cambodia,Afghanistan and Haiti. The materials are now available in English,French, Spanish, Portuguese, Kiswahili, Kannada (a language ofIndia), Dari and French Creole – and most can be freely downloadedfrom the Project WET website.As Oluka sees it, it makes sense to start with children to begin tosolve vexing water issues.“Whenever there is a disaster as a result of water, whether shortageor use of contaminated water, it is mainly the children whosuffer the consequences through diseases and even walking longdistances looking for water,” he noted. “And children are very excellentin spreading news, even to the adults, about sustainable waterusage and control of diseases that are common in our communities.”Water education in ChinaNot all of the water education programmes in whichProject WET is involved in internationally revolve aroundwater, sanitation and hygiene topics. China is one ofseveral countries in which Project WET has been invitedby institutional sponsor Nestlé Waters to share handsonmethods to teach children about water conservationand protection, as well as healthy hydration choices.In partnership with Nestlé Waters and the ShanghaiMinistry of Education, Project WET China launched inJanuary 2010 with 17 Shanghai schools. Project WETmaterials were translated into Chinese and implementedthrough a train-the-trainer process, which has includednot only Project WET staff but also Nestlé Waters Chinaemployees. With a focus on environmental educationand various after-school activities, the priority of theprogramme is to raise local students’ awareness of theimportance of environmental protection – a topic of greatimportance in China.In China, too, educators and local partners havetaken the lessons learned in the classroom outsideof the school walls and into the community. On WorldWater Day 2011, students taking part in Project WETChina broke the Guinness World Record for plasticrecycling, turning in nearly 9,000 kilograms of plasticbottles in a single day. Subsequent communityprojects have included a water activity carnival andglass recycling activities.Shanghai Project WET facilitators have beguntraining teachers outside of the city to scale up theprogramme. The programme launched in Beijing inMarch 2012 and Hunan Province in August 2012, andother NGOs from around China are now joining theeffort to bring water education to China.[ 129 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTSpeaking so that people understand: integratedwater resources management in GuatemalaJoram Gil, United Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization Chair in Sustainable Water Resources, GuatemalaPoor environmental management is a priority issue inthe Republic of Guatemala. Among its causes is thewidespread indifference of citizens, authorities and institutions.Inadequate management of the municipal territorieshas brought consequences such as illegal logging, irrational useof natural resources and a passive attitude to their management.In addition, a conformist culture of inaction and indifference onthe part of citizens and policymakers, combined with a lack ofknowledge and capacities, means that there are limited developmentalternatives for improving living conditions.Poor land use planning is another problem, causedby a lack of respect for environmental regulationsand a weakness in the coordinated participation oforganizations and government. Accelerated deforestation,degradation and fragmentation of habitats,unmanaged changes in the use of soil and the lossof ancestral knowledge complete the problems ofthe country.All this has resulted in increased socio-environmentalvulnerability, the contamination and lossEducational materials for IWRM in the Naranjo watershed[ 130 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTof biodiversity, soil degradation, decreased water rechargeareas, acculturation and intellectual poverty. Several initiativeshave been put in place to address each of these issues and putin place the elements needed to ensure efficient and effectivewater management.Elements of effective water managementAn investigation of the state of water in Guatemala and the Naranjoriver basin in the south-western part of the country was carried out in2004. It detected weaknesses in the public’s acquisition of knowledgeand skills regarding their rights and responsibilities for integratedwater resources management (IWRM) in the Naranjo river basin. 1Support and advice was provided to leaders and citizens toenable self-management and the creation of 10 associations.These associations have since been united to form the AssociatedCommunities for Sustainable Integrated Development of theNaranjo. Officers and employees of the basin’s municipalitieswere also given support and advice on the planning andimplementation of coordinated actions. Today they constitutethe Association of Municipalities of the Naranjo River Basin(MANCUERNA). 2Management models promoted as part of this effort includedrespect for the laws of decentralization, and support for theconstitution and the roles of the departmental, municipal andcommunity development councils (CODEDES,COMUDES and COCODES). Among the COMUDES,support was given for the creation of the MunicipalWater Tables Dialogue. 3 This has promoted theparticipatory formulation of a municipal water policyand of pricing models for services.Management models have also integrated the viewsof at least 14 governmental and non-governmentalentities joined in the Natural Resources Coordinatorof San Marcos, a platform to plan the implementationof specific projects in the department of San Marcos(In the upper Naranjo River Basin). 4 These projectsaim to reduce competition for support, minimize theduplication of functions and ensure the efficient useof government funds and donations from the countriesthat support the development of Guatemala.Framework for IWRMVarious tools have been used to formulate a TerritorialStrategic Planning Commonwealth with an emphasison IWRM. The plan covers a period from 2007 to2020 and, importantly, it includes the participationof authorities and civil society organized throughCOCODES and COMUDES.The project in the Naranjo river watershed faced the principalquestion of how to transfer knowledge and implement IWRMin an area where illiteracy is high and multicultural.Using materials from the UNESCO-IHP Project WET watereducation project, Fundación Solar and the UNESCO Chairin Water Resources produced two educational posters: oneshowing the reality of the Naranjo river watershed withoutIWRM, and the other depicting what will happen when allsectors (environmental, municipal, socioeconomic and soon), work together with IWRM. Along with these, a guide wasdeveloped which used the posters to explain issues such asthe governance, principles and tools of IWRM, gender andmulticulturalism, and management for the sustainability ofwater systems.The educational package was developed with theinvolvement of community leaders and women of theAssociation of Community Partners for Water, Environmentand Infrastructure of the Naranjo River as well as authorities,municipal officials and employees of MANCUERNA.Images: UNESCO-CWR[ 131 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImage: UNESCO-CWRToday, through a number of workshops and meetings, people can express their appreciation of water by exchange of information and local knowledgeThe plan includes:• treatment of solid waste from the five municipalities of the basinvalley in the central part of the department of San Marcos andthree municipalities in the department of Quetzaltenango• implementation of the studies of 12 wastewater treatment plantsat strategic locations• recovery and preservation of 1,478 hectares of forest coverincluding commercially valuable plantations (hemlock, energyforests, orchards)• improved drinking water coverage (quality and quantity)• rehabilitation of power generation units (La Castalia and GranjaEólica del Rodeo, among others).In 2004, 10 associations were organized to support water resourcesmanagement. MANCUERNA and government institutions signed theDeclaration of Miralvalle, establishing the Municipal Water TablesDialogue system to provide a forum for dialogue on IWRM.Several steps were entailed in building the system of water dialoguesand putting it into operation:• direct involvement of the water sector, national authorities,local authorities and organized population• socioeconomic and environmental diagnosis of the municipalities• administrative diagnostics of municipalities• associative diagnostics• generation of a geographic information system from the basinhydrological study• capacity building• involvement and advocacy at the local, municipal andregional levels.Municipal and community development councils,in conjunction with community partnerships, developedthe proposed Municipal Water Policy, which ispromoted and in most cases supported by municipalauthorities. The policy is the basis for the preparation ofstrategic development plans for both the municipalitiesand the commonwealth.Economic Development, Tourism, Environmentand Natural Resources CommissionBy 2013 the Municipal Water Tables Dialogue systemhad evolved to become institutionalized as a mandatorycommittee, known as the Economic Development,Tourism, Environment and Natural ResourcesCommission, in each municipality of the urban andrural development councils framework. The policy hasenabled several IWRM initiatives to be put into practice:• sensitization and training in IWRM• formulation of municipal water policies• establishment of the Municipal Water Tables Dialogue• generation and management of information onwater resources• social participation as a guarantor of sustainability• implementation of a water inventory for the amountand quality of the resource.Associations for cooperation in IWRMOne of the first decisions taken at the beginning of thedecade was to promote the development of rural and[ 132 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTurban associations in each of the eight municipalities of the upperNaranjo River Basin, as well as the associations represented by eachmunicipality government to elaborate policies, programmes andprojects for coordinated water management. This effort involvescommunity associations and municipalities to ensure water resourcesare recognized as a cross-cutting issue. It has been supported by theimplementation of participative diagnostics to establish the guidelinesof municipal water policies that trigger multiple processes – ofwhich we are now seeing the initial results.The objectives of the association at the top of the Naranjo riverbasin have been to take measures to operationalize water policies;seek agreements on the management of waste solids, water contaminationand recovery of water recharge areas; and promote productivespecial uses of water resources. All this is done through dialogue andcooperation between key stakeholders including authorities, society,associations and public institutions.Institutional arrangementsA key example of this cooperation can be found in the joint effortsbetween universities, non-governmental organizations, privatesector companies and government institutions. A decision wastaken to conduct learning and demonstration projects (PADs),working together with communities and institutions in the sector.This process is aimed at enabling the systematization of experiences,knowledge transfer and construction methodologies thatcan be replicated in different regions in western Guatemala, interrelatingthese efforts with the Municipal Water Tables Dialogue.The strategy needs to incorporate, among other elements, monitoringsystems and the prevention of critical situations; sustainablemanagement of natural resources; access to water, sanitation andprimary health services; communication systems; and access tosources of income.Since ancient times people have expressed their appreciation ofwater through their culture. Today, that cultural aspect is complementedby a political connotation and focused on the representativeparticipation of society. This new participatory model, through anumber of workshops and meetings with stakeholders in Spanishand native languages, seeks to understand reality; identify thecultural changes needed to integrate and strengthen the legal andinstitutional framework for management; and enable the continuousexchange of information and local knowledge.The PADs are based in the concept of Team Learning Projects. 5PADs open up protected areas for the construction and adaptationof knowledge to solve complex problems such as those ofIWRM. They provide an answer to the complexity of developmentprocesses and the need to create spaces that promote sustainablehuman development.Committee strategies involve the formation of an interdisciplinary,inter-agency and intersectoral team, which looks forprofessional members from the technical, social sciences, administrativeand economics fields. A key component of the strategyis the sensitization and training of key actors in civil society andthe municipal governments, to enable the creation of a favourableattitude and the development of knowledge and skills to intervenein water resources management.Knowledge: the base of interventionExperience shows that developing an effective IWRM strategy beginswith deepening understanding of the reality on which the strategyintervenes. It is also important to contact local men’sand women’s leaders and municipal authorities. Thesecontacts were key to initiating the implementation ofthe Naranjo river basin project.During the project, dimensions of human realityand social circumstances emerged that were difficultto predict at the planning stage. The language,restrictions on the participation of women, short-termexpectations, the existence of conflicts, communitymotivation and the strength of the municipalauthorities, among others, were factors that forcedadjustments to the project. These factors transformedthe project into an exercise of reorganization, introductionof changes and constant learning.The understanding of political will is often simplifiedas a matter of convincing the mayor. However,historical evidence shows that success depends moreon perseverance with a fixed idea and clear objectivethan it does on the characteristics, interests or vocationsof the authorities. Success is contagious and, inthis case, the efficacy of the organization processesand the training in some municipalities capturedthe political will of others. The existence of theMANCUERNA organizations suggests the sustainabilityof that political will.Although it was possible to use the natural interestsof civil society and the authorities in water andits management as a topic, it was also necessary toprovide the tools required to transform those interestsinto processes and results. Making those toolsaccessible to communities was another factor in theproject’s success.Informed dialoguePreconceived ideas, prejudices and interpretations orpersonal interests can act as distractions with moreweight than the objective elements of the issue.In this context, the study on the state of water inthe basin provided a valuable input to standardizeparticipants’ knowledge of water and its management.The study of the results as a baseline showsthat distractions were diminished to enable a focuson the objective analysis of the situation and thedevelopment of alternatives.Empowering womenIn the reconstruction of a project experience it iscommon to find arguments or testimonies about theactive role of women in the proper use of water forproductive purposes and in everyday life.In a social organization like the basin, with traditionalroles for men and women and a privileged position formen, it is usual to find intolerance and discriminationtowards the participation of women. Empoweringwomen will remain a challenge for organizations andfuture initiatives. These initiatives should bring positiveresults for everyone and place women on a higherdevelopment level without returning them to the subjugatedroles of the past.[ 133 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTWater and development: a history ofcooperation in the Dominican RepublicFernando Rivera Colinton, Researcher, Centre for the Sustainable Managementof Water Resources in the Caribbean Island States, National Water Research Institute (INDRHI)Water cooperation and conflict over water use must havebegun in the Dominican Republic (DR) with the arrivalof the Spanish conquerors in the fifteenth century.However, the development of modern water exploitation and cooperationbegan in the late nineteenth century when one Spanishman, Juan Caballero, initiated the construction of an irrigationchannel in the south. At the beginning of the twentieth century LuisL. Bogaert, of French origin, built the first channel with technicalcriteria in the north-west region. In 1917 an American companybegan the construction of an irrigation system in the south, whichlater became the first irrigation district in DR. Before this point, theprivate sector had been the main constructor of infrastructure forwater use. In 1924 the state began to develop its water sector, andmost of the country’s channels and dams were built using internalfinancial resources between then and the late 1970s.Cooperation programmesDuring the 1980s DR, like most Latin American and Caribbean countries,experienced economic constraint. The irrigation system wasinefficient, with low crop productivity and deterioration of the infrastructuredue to neglected maintenance as a result of lack of funds. As aconsequence the Government, in collaboration with bilateral and multilateralagencies, decided to organize water user associations and transferThe country now produces more than 80 per cent of the food it needsImage: José Del Carmen Cabrerato them responsibility for rebuilding the infrastructure ofthe irrigation systems. The first project of this type beganin 1987. It was financed by the United States Agency forInternational Development with the technical assistance ofUtah State University in two pilot areas: Ysura in the southand Ulises Francisco Espiallat in the north. This projectwas followed by others, giving birth to a programme thatwas extended to all irrigated areas.Some of the key projects implemented during thistime include:• the AGLIPO I and AGLIPO II AgriculturalDevelopment Projects and the Project forTechnological Improvement of Irrigated Agriculture,financed by the Japan Bank InternationalCorporation with the technical assistance of theJapan International Cooperation Agency• the San Juan Agricultural Development Project,aided by the Inter-American Development Bank(IDB) and IEDF• the Irrigated Land and Basin Management Project,funded by the World Bank• the Management Program for Irrigation Systems forWater User Associations, funded by IDB• the Program for Reconstruction and Improvementof Damages of Hurricane George, funded by IDB.DR has received cooperation in water education andinstitutional development and in water cooperation,sustainability and poverty eradication from many otherinstitution and organizations, both national and international,including the German Technical Cooperation;the USA Corp of Engineers; Brigham Young University,USA; and organizations from Israel, Holland, Mexico,Chile, Brazil and Spain.One of the most interesting examples of water education,cooperation and institutional development is theWater Culture Program initiated in 1997 with the mainobjective of raising awareness about the importance ofwater preservation among the population. In order tocreate this programme an inter-institutional agreementwas signed between all the institutions in the DR watersector and some in the educational sector. These includedthe Water Resources National Institute, the Secretary ofState for Education, Fine Arts and Culture, the Secretaryof State for Health and Welfare, the National Institute of[ 134 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTWater and Sewerage, the Water and Sewerage Corporation of SantoDomingo, the Water and Sewerage Corporation of Santiago, and theWater and Sewerage Corporation of La Romana. A key success ofthe programme has been the creation of educational guidelines onwater that are used in schools from the first to the eighth grade. Theprogramme has also implemented the Water Quality Watcher projectwhich integrates civil society in the gathering of physical, chemicaland bacteriological information on water quality. The programmeorganizes lectures in different communities and has a Hall of WaterCulture that is visited by many students.Water cooperation and education resultsSome key results from this process have been:• the organization of all 89,000 users into 32 water users’associations• a reduction of conflicts over the use of waterdue to better organization and increased administrative capacity• increases in distribution efficiency• a contribution to a democratic culture in rural areas• increased recovery of maintenance costs from an averageof 17 per cent when the systems were administered by theGovernment, to an average of 80 per cent now that it isadministered by water users’ associations• the construction of new water infrastructure and improvementof some of the existing infrastructure.As a result of all these efforts in DR the irrigated lands, which represent11 per cent of agricultural land, now produce 60 per cent of agricultureproduction. The country is producing more than 80 per cent of the foodneeded to feed its own population and more than 4 million touristsevery year. This has contributed to reducing poverty and improvingthe health of the population with better access to food at a lower price.One of the most interesting institutions involved in water cooperation,sustainability and poverty eradication in DR is the San Jose deOcoa Development Association (ADESJO). This non-governmentalorganization was founded by father Jose Luis Quinn from Canada in the1970s and it operates in the San Jose province located in the south partof the country’s Central Mountain area. The success of ADESJO centreson people involvement and horizontal cooperation among intendedbeneficiaries. ADESJO has promoted a strong community involvementin its own development process. In each of the 83 communities in SanJose de Ocoa, it has promoted the creation of a Community Board thatis in charge of planning and coordinating community developmentprojects. It also has specialized committees on irrigation, reforestation,forest monitoring, producer associations and women’s associations. Allof these committees do voluntary work in community projects and inthe plot of each farmer through a rotatory scheme. The philosophy thatpromotes ADESJO is self reliance and mutual help.Lessons learned and challengesThe lessons learned are that cooperation is key component for waterdevelopment success: cooperation between north and south, south andsouth, country cooperation and above all, horizontal cooperation atthe community level. People involvement at all stages of the developmentprocess through an interactive approach can create a betterunderstanding of the problem and more commitment to contributingto the solution. True development requires an extended commitment todevelop a self-management culture that allows individuals and communitiesto take action on their own. Los Martinez and other projectssponsored by ADESJO are a good example. ADESJO hasbeen accompanying these communities for 40 years.Today, the leaders in the 83 communities are the sonsand daughters of the founders of the first organizationsand they will pass this responsibility to their own children.While there have been notable successes, many problemsremain unsolved. There is a need to reduce thewaste of water. Irrigation efficiency must increase fromits current 25 per cent, and there is a need to reducethe 50 per cent water loss from aqueducts in mostmajor cities. The sources and quality of water mustbe preserved. Most basins are facing deforestation andcontamination with pesticides and untreated water.And people need to be conscious of the real economicvalue of water and willing to pay for it.Case study: Los MartinezAgricultural production covers almost 41 ha, with landownerssharing their land in return for access to an irrigation systemLos Martinez is an interesting example of communitydevelopment. It was founded in the early 1900s, 15 km awayfrom San Jose de Ocoa at an altitude of 400-900 metresabove sea level. Until 1980 it suffered extreme poverty withan unemployment rate of about 50 per cent and high levels ofilliteracy. Housing was often inadequate and most people didnot own any land, or the land was unsuitable for agriculturedue to steep slopes. The community did not have roads,schools or health facilities. Most people made a living frommigratory agriculture and wood coal production – resulting in thedeforestation and soil degradation of 80 per cent of the land.With the help of ADESJO the community organized afarmers’ association called ‘La Vencedora’ (The Winner);a women’s association called La Nueva Esperanza (TheNew Hope); a community board, an irrigation committee, areforestation committee, a forest monitoring committee andan association of Fathers and Friends of the School.Much has been accomplished by the Los Martinezcommunity, which comprises 47 families and approximately235 inhabitants. They initiated a ‘Private Agrarian Reform’ thatextended to other communities in San Jose de Ocoa. Thosewho have land share up to 50 per cent of it with those who donot. In return, they receive access to an irrigation system thatmakes their land more productive and profitable. In addition,the community now has a school, health centre, aqueduct, newhouses for the poorest people, a soil conservation programme,a fruit tree planting programme, a small fish farm, a minihydroelectric centre that generates 15 KW and provides everyhome with energy 24 hours a day for US$2.5 per month, asmall honey production farm for women, an Internet centreand full employment.Image: José Del Carmen Cabrera[ 135 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTIntegrated water resources management inPeru through shared vision planningGuillermo Mendoza and Hal Cardwell, International Center for Integrated Water Resources Management,Institute for Water Resources of the US Army Corps of Engineers; and Pedro Guerrero, Project for Modernizationof Water Resources Management, National Water Authority of Peru, Ministry of Agriculture of PeruWater is Peru’s new gold. In the past decade, Peruhas been going through a dramatic transformationwith high economic growth and a growing prosperouspopulation. However, water is in the wrong place and thecountry recognizes the need to develop sustainable solutionsfor water management. With more than 80 per cent of its waterfalling in the Andes, hundreds of miles from the growing populationcentres along the arid coast, and hydrology already beingradically altered by melting glaciers, Peru needed to act. In 2009the country passed a new water law and set out on an ambitiousplan to develop locally-driven solutions for water sustainability.In effect, the law states that water is both an economicand social good, and that integrated water resources management(IWRM) incorporates social, cultural and environmentalvalues with the goal to maximize social and economic well-beingwithout compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems.Easier said than done.The Chili River Basin outside Arequipa: the new water law broadens stakeholderparticipation and seeks to internalize the costs of water pollutionImage: Guillermo F. MendozaShortly after the law was passed, the newly-createdNational Water Authority of Peru (ANA) initiatedpilots at six basins to decentralize water resourcesmanagement, create river basin councils and implementtransparent and participatory planning. A keyaspect of the pilots was the use of a collaborative, technically-informedplanning process known as sharedvision planning (SVP) to develop IWRM plans thatrecognized the multiple interests of a growing society.These water resources planning efforts are history in themaking, as Peru integrates planning principles, structuredparticipation and systems modelling to supportdecision-making at river basin scales.Peru’s major water management challengesThe challenges faced by Peru are significant on threecounts. First, it was unclear how to implement the 2009Water Resources Law. Integration and public participationhave become standard goals for water resourcesmanagement worldwide. However, the logistical,technical and socio-institutional complexity of waterproblems in Peru, as elsewhere, make it difficult to findmany successes in the implemention of collaborativeplanning, trade-off analysis and decision-making forIWRM at the river basin scale.Second, water resources management in Peru hadhistorically been a centralized process largely focusedon agriculture. In contrast, the new law requires newregional governance institutions such as river basincouncils, that have authority to develop and validateparticipatory IWRM plans. The development of theseIWRM plans will require that the councils make decisionson social and economic well-being trade-offswith participation of the various interests in a basin.Investments and planning in Peru’s water resourceswill have to meet multisectoral demands on waterand Pacific draining basins, support unprecedentedeconomic growth, and enhance social equity becausemany Peruvians, especially in the headwaters of thebasins, continue to live below the poverty line.Third, water conflicts are real social stressors to aneconomy that is one of the world’s fastest growing (grossdomestic product (GDP) grew 9.8 per cent in 2008 and6.3 per cent in 2013), but that occurs largely along an arid[ 136 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTThe six PMRGH pilot basins currently implementing SVP todevelop IWRM plans that are validated by river basin councilsSource: ANAThe circles of influence applied by SVP in Peru to develop IWRMplans at the six pilot basinsSource: ANAModel builders (Level 1):Technical Coordinators ofthe basin, Consultant Firm,President of RBC, AAAModel Validators (Level 2):Technical Working groupsInterest Groups (Level 3):Water user associations,municipalities, institutions,universities, NGOs,professional societiesDecision Maker (Level 4):River Basin Council (RBC)coast (15 mm average rainfall) with 30 per cent employmentin the agricultural sector (13 per cent of GDP).This wealth has enabled increases in public and privateinvestments. But it may have in turn triggered a record189 social conflicts recorded in 2008 by the ombudsman’soffice of Peru, which are associated with infrastructure inresource-rich areas of the Andean highlands. 1 Transparentand participatory processes can actually hinder negotiationsrelated to natural resources, especially when interestgroups are inflexible. The challenge is to develop a mechanismthat can structure transparency and participation,involving a broad range of stakeholders while minimizingrancour and needless delays in decision-making.SVP in PeruThe challenges listed above are not unique to Peru, butin fact routinely confront water planners and managersin the United States and around the world. In response,the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) developedSVP as a collaborative planning process that integratessystems modelling, structured public participation andtraditional water resources planning methods into apractical approach to solve water resource problems. 2SVP helps to facilitate agreement between diverse interestgroups on the facts, multiple objectives and valuesrelated to a watershed or basin.SVP has its origins in a response to severe droughtsin much of the US West, South-East and the Missouri-Mississippi valley in the 1980s. The National DroughtStudy developed a drought preparedness method thatwas based on a systems analysis approach designedby the Harvard Water Program of the early 1960s,which shaped the basic principles and standards thatguide federal water resources investment. The droughtpreparedness method, however, required planners tocooperate with decision makers and stakeholders todetermine the criteria used to accept or reject a droughtplan and to develop metrics to evaluate alternatives; andthis collaborative technical analysis method eventuallyevolved into SVP. SVP is part of a growing trend towardscollaborative modelling for decision support in waterresources, with an increasing number of water managerslooking towards cooperation in technical analysis asa solid and useful approach for water solutions.In 2011, the Project for Modernization of WaterResources Management (PMGRH), a section of ANA,initiated six IWRM pilot basins to evaluate execution ofPeru’s 2009 Water Resources Law. 3 To do this, PMGRHselected and adapted the USACE-SVP framework as theprocess for transparent governance of natural resourcesand participatory modelling. The framework would beused in IWRM plan development by each of the six riverbasin councils in the Chancay-Lambayeque, Chira-Piura, Puyango-Tumbes, Chancay-Huaral, Chili-Quilcaand Locumba river basins.Structured collaborationSVP provides a framework to facilitate stakeholderand decision maker collaboration in the iterative[ 137 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImage: Guillermo F. MendozaImage: Aelix Serrat CapdevilaAgricultural, municipal, industry and subsistence husbandry stakeholders at aninception stage stakeholder workshop for the Chili-Quilca river basin in 2011A working session with ANA in 2011, illustrating a simulation modelwith objectives and metrics identified in a mock workshopformulation and technical analysis of alternatives, so that theneeds of participants in the planning process solutions are betterdefined and understood, and solutions are developed to meetthem. The collaborative process is structured through ‘circles ofinfluence’ that define roles, commitments, communication channels,rules of engagement and, importantly, the two-way flow oftechnical information between interest groups, model buildersand analysts. The circles of influence concept enforces a paradigmshift by placing the model builders at the inner-lowest level,to be directed by stakeholders and decision makers at the highest.This is meant to ensure that a decision model is built startingfrom the decision objectives that matter, and that complexityis kept at a minimum to ensure that decisions of interest can bemade by stakeholders and those within the scope of the decisionmakers. Uncertain variables are examined first to determinewhether their further understanding would affect the outcomeof a decision. At an ongoing SVP process facilitated by USACEin the Nam Gam sub-basin of the Mekong River in Thailand, allmodelling is done with Excel because all members of the riverworking group have access to it.The members of level 1 (the model builders), are typicallysalaried and have the ability to develop sophisticated analysesand models of the water resources system of interest. In Peruthe model builders consist of the technical coordinators of theriver basin council, a consultant firm, the president of the riverbasin council and the autonomous water authority, which isa regional office of ANA. In these pilots, leaders of the interestgroups represent themes of Peru’s national water strategy(financing, water quality, risk and climate change, institutionsand culture of water, and water resources benefits)in level 2 (model validation), to test and help definethe decision metrics, objectives and measures to beevaluated with respect to the problem statements andinterests of their constituents. These first two groupsmeet with high frequency in technical work sessions.The broad interest groups (level 3) and decisionmakers (level 4) meet at lower frequency duringstructured workshops to further provide values andinterests, and decision scope (such as considerationof national or regional strategies, politics and masterplans) respectively. In these Peru pilots, the decisionmakers are engaged three times to validate theprogress of the IWRM planning process and to markofficial completion of the state of the basin (‘what dowe have?’), identification of measures to undertake(‘what do we want?’), and selection of measures toimplement (‘what is possible?’). Through these threeiterations the decision makers become familiar withthe IWRM decision model for the basin, and collaborateto define and understand the trade-offs that willhave to be made.Integrated water resources planning andsystems modellingPlanning is a structured approach to problem solvingthat provides a rational framework for decision-making.In general, planning starts by defining the problems andopportunities for change, defining objectives and criteria,[ 138 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTformulating alternatives to consider, evaluating how well each alternativemeets the objectives and criteria and, finally, looking at trade-offsto choose a preferred alternative. Generally, planning is an iterativeprocess with objectives, criteria and alternatives all being modified asnew information is gained.SVP intimately melds the planning process with technical analysisand structured collaboration using a collaboratively developed andvetted technical model of the system. For example, the problemstatement and objectives provide information on the types ofmodels, analysis, visualization and complexity required. In Peru,the planning process is designed to last 18 months, with three iterationphases of six months each. Integrants of levels 2, 3 and 4 ofthe circles of influence establish metrics for the evaluation categorizedinto four IWRM ‘accounts’: economic growth, environmentalquality, financial sustainability and social equity. Different stakeholdersunderstand these IWRM accounts through various metricsthat are identified, agreed upon and modelled.The planning group develops the technical analysis model withdirection and inputs from the many workshops and working meetings.In order to build capacity and consistency within ANA and thePMGRH project, a water evaluation and planning model is beingused to characterize the hydrology and hydraulic system. Excel andSTELLA are used to model the impact of different alternatives, thetrade-offs and the evaluation metrics.The challenges to implement IWRM are often not technical issues.Rather, they are institutional drivers that are often unique to thedifferent sectors to be coordinated, such as environment, floodmanagement, energy, mining, municipal and industry. These sectorsnot only have conflicting interests, but also differing public supportor understanding. SVP provides rules and techniques to structurecollaboration, and the means to communicate and simulate planningalternatives that take into account the diverse planning objectivesand sectoral values.Promotion of best practicesSVP was introduced to ANA in 2009 as an option to execute thesix IWRM pilots. After a week-long workshop with ANA’s technicalstaff, SVP would become the approach to develop IWRMplans. Over a year, the International Center for IntegratedWater Resources Management (ICIWaRM), a United NationsEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organization category IIcentre, worked with ANA to adjust the methodology and providedtraining to key staff who became counterparts to an implementingconsultant firm. ICIWaRM helped develop the terms of referencefor implementation by private consultant firms, and led capacitybuilding, initial inception and methodology adjustment workshopswith national and regional ANA staff and stakeholders. The inceptionworkshops included representatives of municipal, irrigation,hydropower and subsistence farming and husbandry sectors. Thegoal of these workshops was to prepare and familiarize stakeholderswith an upcoming participatory planning effort for IWRM.The future of SVP for water resources managementICIWaRM has been replicating this US Corps of Engineers collaborativemodelling approach with river working groups in Thailandand Mongolia. Upon request by the Thailand National MekongRiver Commission to explore this collaborative modelling andnegotiation framework, ICIWaRM has begun an SVP study in theNam Kam sub-basin of the Mekong River. In Thailand, sub-basinworking groups of stakeholders and interest groupshave been tasked to support and facilitate IWRM,but they do not have the required training or guidance.The working groups have an understanding oftheir problems and needs, and of their current watersystems, but not of management options, impacts ordecision-making frameworks. By empowering localtechnical people with tools and a structured collaborativeplanning process, SVP can help interest groupslearn about their system and options and jointly movetowards sustainable solutions.The need to adapt to a changing climate hasspurred additional interest in SVP as a way to engagea broad set of stakeholders in the technical and valuediscussions inherent in developing sustainable watersolutions in the face of climate change. SVP providesa decision-scaling framework whereby water resourcesmanagers can focus on all the climate states that theirsystem is vulnerable to and develop plans and likelihoodanalyses around watershed objectives in respectof these vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities need tobe defined in a stakeholder process and then linkedthrough technical analysis to potential alternatives.The concept of starting with stakeholder-determinedvulnerability thresholds contrasts with more traditiontop-down climate adaptation analyses that start bydeveloping forecasts of future climate states.The niche exists because, across the world, manycountries are promoting ambitious initiatives forparticipatory IWRM planning with river basin councils.However, there exists little practical guidanceon how to make decisions and perform the tradeoffsthat are needed to evaluate IWRM strategies.The integration of social and engineering principlesis key to the success of SVP. Most social scientistsdo not have experience in developing the simulationmodels and technical analyses required to evaluatethe impact of alternatives and trade-offs. Mostengineers are not accustomed to being guided bystakeholders who provide the multi-objective valuesand interests that ultimately drive decision-making.SVP integrates these different fields and provides astructured framework for IWRM.The common misconception about IWRM is that itis about simply integrating stakeholders of all sectors.We posit that IWRM is about planning under at leastfour types of objective categories: financial sustainability,economic growth, social well-being andenvironmental quality. A diversity of water sectorstakeholders is important only because it allows theadequate definition of the metrics and objectives undereach of these categories. SVP provides a forum thatwill probably not provide an optimal solution, but it isone that will facilitate decision-making under complexand conflictive environments. This is one reason whythis work is being well received in Peru and Thailand.At the end of the day, river basin councils have tomake trade-offs with limited budgets, diverse interestsand high uncertainty.[ 139 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTEducation and training for hydrology and waterresources development and management in IndiaRakesh Kumar and R. D. Singh, National Institute of Hydrology, IndiaPresently, India is facing innumerable challenges in planning,development and management of water resources.Well-trained manpower is required to meet thesechallenges. However, water resources have been a relativelyneglected subject for education and training in developingcountries like India.Suitable education and training is needed for hydrologists at all levelsImage: National Institute of HydrologyIn these developing countries, a general hydrology course is normallyoffered in the areas of civil engineering, agricultural engineering,geology and geography. Most of the academic institutions concentrateon scientific education, leaving the applications of knowledge to belearned through on-the-job training. However, no amount of trainingcan substitute for a well-planned and executed education programme,which should enable fresh degree holders to become well-trained andskilled professionals at various levels. Hydrology and water resourcesinclude interdisciplinary subjects such as civil engineering, agriculturalengineering, atmospheric science, meteorology, geology,geophysics, mathematics, computer science, chemistry, ecology andgeo-informatics. Thus, solving complex hydrological and water problemsinvolves multidisciplinary approaches. However, at present mostorganizations lack the adequate manpower, competence and skillsneeded to adopt multidisciplinary approaches and new technologiesfor solving complex water issues based on the concept of integratedwater resources management for sustainable development.Undergraduate education currently gives varying levels of coverageto the water resources subjects in civil and agricultural engineering.Postgraduate education in hydrology and waterresources is also inadequate in its response to the issues.Educational programmes in schools do not adequatelyinclude evolving methodologies for assessment andintegrated management of water resources to meetthe needs of economic and social development andapproaches for conservation and management of waterresources. At present, a substantial part of the subjectof water resources is being dealt with under geography,biology and chemistry. An immediate and substantialtask is to decide on the curriculum and course syllabiand prepare the necessary study materials. Slight changeswould be required in subjects like geography to introducegeomorphology and climate change, and in biology,social sciences and chemistry to include the availabilityand management of water including rainwater harvesting,water conservation, wastewater treatment, ecologicalconservation and the interaction of man and biosphere.Currently, undergraduate education gives varyinglevels of coverage to water resources subjects, mainlyin civil engineering and agricultural engineering disciplines.Undergraduate courses should be designed toimpart basic and applied knowledge to students aboutwater resources problems and their solutions. Effortsshould be made to provide in-depth knowledge aboutthe basic theories involved in water resources planning,design and management. Some of the basic coursesshould be made compulsory; whereas advanced coursesshould be elective. Subjects like hydrology and waterresources should be introduced as part of the curriculumfor undergraduate students. Undergraduatesshould also be introduced to hydrologic design criteriaand to the procedures and practices for the planning,design and management of various water resourcesprojects being followed in India and the world over. Forthis purpose, the data requirements and infrastructurefacilities required for providing solutions to the varioushydrological and water resources problems should becovered. Specialized courses in hydrology and waterresources at both undergraduate and diploma levelshould be designed and run at educational institutes toprovide in-depth and focused knowledge of the requiredsubjects for hydrologic analyses and water resourcesplanning, development and management. Adequateinfrastructural facilities including placement of welleducated,trained and competent faculty staff as well[ 140 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTas the establishment of the required laboratory and computationalfacilities should be a priority. Laboratories should be well-providedwith state-of-the-art equipment. Training in traditional computerprogramming is not adequate to prepare water resources studentsto deal with the available computing technology. There is a criticalneed to formalize the computing curriculum in water resourceseducation to meet the challenges of this fast-growing technology.Postgraduate education in hydrology and water resources inIndia is being imparted at a number of academic organizations. Thesyllabi of these postgraduate courses are revised keeping in viewpast deliberations which later came up as the recommendations ofinternational organizations. However, a lot more needs to be done inview of the challenges being faced in the area of hydrology and waterresources considering anthropogenic changes to global water andenergy cycles, natural periodicity and climate change. Consideringthe present day requirements of water resources in the country, thereis a need to strengthen postgraduate-level programmes by includingsome advanced level courses such as coastal hydrology, snowand glacier hydrology, arid zone hydrology, forest hydrology, urbanhydrology, environmental hydrology and eco-hydrology in additionto the conventional courses of surface water hydrology, groundwaterhydrology and watershed management. Furthermore, coursesare needed on the application of modern tools and soft computingtechniques in hydrology and water resources, covering geographicalinformation system (GIS) technology; remote sensing; isotopictechniques; laboratory-based soil investigations; hydraulic andhydrological investigations; water quality; hydrological instrumentation;the development and applications of software and informationtechnology; operational research and soft computing techniques likeartificial neural networks, fuzzy logic and genetic algorithms; basicconcepts of artificial intelligence; integrated flood management;decision support systems (DSSs) and their applications; and integratedwater resources development and management. Postgraduatecourses should be framed with a six-month or one-yearproject, wherein students are given water resourcesproblems to solve after reviewing existing knowledge inthe area. This could be a research project or the developmentof software integrating the latest knowledge inthe courses leading to the integrated planning, developmentand management of water resources.In order to meet the needs of short-term and longtermplans for water resources development andmanagement in the country, the creation of suitablemechanisms for education and training of hydrologistsis not only necessary at degree and postgraduatelevel, but also at junior levels, such as junior engineers,technicians or observers. Adequate trained manpoweris necessary to improve the capabilities of operationalorganizations at the centre and in the states withregard to observations as well as primary and secondaryprocessing of hydrological data. Though there is noregular course for technicians training in hydrology,meteorology and other related fields, various organizationslike the Central Water Commission (CWC),India Meteorological Department (IMD), CentralGround Water Board (CGWB) and the state irrigationdepartments, which deal with subjects related to waterresources, have created facilities for on-the-job andin-service training of personnel. However, the trainingprogrammes for technicians and observers are highlyinadequate. There is only partial coverage of hydrologyand water resources as a subject under civil engineeringdiploma courses to provide background to personnelat junior hydrologist level. The education and trainingprogrammes for observers and technicians may betaken up by polytechnic institutes, industrial trainingImage: National Institute of HydrologyContinuing education programmes, summer courses and refresher courses are being organized by a wide range of institutions[ 141 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTShort training workshops and courses are emphasizing the latest developments inhydrological analyses, design and software applicationsImage: National Institute of Hydrologyinstitutes (ITIs) and various data collecting organizations such asCWC, IMD, CGWB, the Central Water and Power Research Station,the Central Pollution Control Board and various state irrigation andwater resources organizations.Continuing education programmes, summer courses andrefresher courses are being organized to provide an overviewof the new technologies and their applications in hydrology andwater resources. Such programmes are not only being organized byacademic institutions like IITs and engineering colleges, but alsoby some of the central and state government organizations suchas the National Water Academy, CWC, Rajiv Gandhi NationalGround Water Training and Research Institute, CGWB, NationalInstitute of Hydrology, Central Water and Power Research Station,IMD; Department of Hydrology, Department of Water ResourcesDevelopment and Management and National Remote SensingCentre. Courses are also organized by water and land managementinstitutes, technical teacher training institutes, staff training andirrigation research institutes in states, the Karnataka Engineer StaffTraining College at Krishnarajasagar, the Engineering Staff Collegeat Nasik and other similar state institutes for training in-servicepersonnel in various areas of water resources.The National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee has made a remarkablecontribution through the organization of short-durationtraining workshops and courses at Roorkee and in various statesfor the transfer of technology, with an emphasis on the latest developmentsin hydrological analysis, design and software applications.The institute has also organized a number of training programmesfor middle-level officers of the central and state organizations whichhave participated in the World Bank funded Hydrology ProjectPhase-I and Phase-II. The institute has provided training for a largenumber of participants from central government, state governmentsand academic organizations under its technological transferand capacity building programmes. Some important areas coveredby the training programmes include observation, processing andanalysis of precipitation data; flood frequency analysis; groundwatermodelling; flood routing and forecasting; reservoiroperation; urban hydrology; GIS and remote sensingapplications in hydrology; snow and glacier hydrology;water quality modelling; and the assessment of climatechange impacts on water resources.For senior level officers, refresher courses of one ortwo days duration should be organized on specializedtopics of technological advancement. In such coursesthe officers may learn about the latest developments incomputational facilities and the role and applications ofinformation technology. Some of the specialized topicson which refresher courses could be organized includehydrological design aids, software applications, informationtechnology applications for data management,applications of GIS and remote sensing techniques,modern tools for hydrological investigations andanalysis, and decision DSSs. This would be helpful inmaking the officers aware of existing gaps in the practicesbeing followed and the availability of improvedprocedures and methodologies for the planning, designand management of water resources. It would also helpto develop the required infrastructure facilities andwell-trained manpower for better development andmanagement of water resources.In India a large number of regional languages arein practice and in order to reach the masses, emphasisshould be placed on activities that create publicawareness in people’s own languages along with Hindiand English. Pamphlets on water awareness should beprepared in different languages and public awarenessshould be created in a well-planned and coordinatedmanner. Video films should be prepared on topics ofpublic interest, and these should be screened at largegatherings. In India, the literacy rate of women is quitelow, so women’s participation in the public awarenessprogrammes should be given due emphasis. Themessage of the importance of water and its interconnectednesswith the environment around us, and allthat the various organizations in the country are doingin this context, needs to be imprinted in the minds ofupcoming generations. Effective programmes muststart in the elementary schools and continue throughsecondary and higher secondary schools. A participatoryapproach should be adopted to making the peopleof various sections of society aware about the differentissues of water resources management. Mass communicationprogrammes should be launched using modernmethods of communication to educate people aboutwater conservation and efficient utilization of water.Capacity building should be perceived as the processwhereby a community equips itself to become an activeand well-informed partner in decision-making. Theprocess of capacity building must be aimed at bothincreasing access to water resources and changing thepower relationships between stakeholders. Capacitybuilding is not only limited to officials and technicians,but must also include the general awareness of the localpopulation regarding their responsibilities in the sustainablemanagement of water resources. Policy decisions in[ 142 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTwater resources projects should be directed to improve knowledge,attitudes and practices concerning the linkages between health andhygiene; provide higher water supply service levels; and improve theenvironment through safe disposal of human waste based on ethicalconcepts of water utilization and water conservation.Information, education and communication (IEC) activities whichinclude mass awareness programmes for water conservation, rainwaterharvesting and water quality conservation are being organizedby the various organizations of the Ministry of Water Resources,Government of India with the active cooperation of various stakeholdersand schoolchildren. Such IEC activities are being especiallyorganized on the occasions of large gatherings of people, such asduring the kumbh mela held at Haridwar in which millions of peopleparticipated. Through such activities the public is becoming awareof the importance of water and its conservation.In order to meet the needs of short-term and long-term plansfor water resources planning, development and management in thecountry, there is a need to evolve a long-term plan and suitablemechanism for the education and training of water resources engineers,scientists, observers and technicians, and for strengtheningcooperation among the various institutions and improving individualcommunities in real ways. Water education and training impartedto the field engineers of various state water resources departmentsand irrigation departments, as well as the faculties of educationalinstitutions, is helping to provide well-trained manpower for theplanning, development and management of water resources. It isfacilitating better planning, development and operation of waterresources projects. For example, a DSS (Planning) (DSS (P)) isbeing developed by the international DSS (P) consultants for theidentified river basins of the nine states of India with the supportof the World Bank and scientists, and engineers are being trainedon the DSS (P) software for integrated water resources developmentand management. There is active cooperation among some ofthe organizations and institutes that are involved in the applicationof emerging techniques such as GIS and remote sensing, isotopictechniques, hydrological modelling, soft computing,water quality modelling, assessment of the impact ofclimate change and downscaling of climate data. Similarefforts are being made by the educational and researchinstitutions, which are providing continuing educationand training to the engineers and academiciansof organizations engaged in water resources planningand development. Some international training coursesare also organized for participants from South AsianAssociation for Regional Cooperation, African andAfro-Asian countries. Some of the scientists and engineersreceive training from developed Asian, Europeanand American organizations. Such efforts are leadingto improvements in the capabilities of operational andresearch organizations at the centre and in the states inthe water resources sector.To make the educational and training programmesmore effective, brainstorming sessions, workshopsand seminars should be organized to indentify theconstraints, bottlenecks and difficulties facing fieldengineers, practitioners, planners, researchers, academicsand other related professionals in adopting newand emerging technologies and water cooperation forsolving complex water issues. Modern audio-visualaids, including videoconferencing facilities, should becreated and effectively used by the various organizationsfor training personnel under distance learningprogrammes. Large-scale awareness and effective participationin water resources management practices mustbe encouraged by the creation of public awareness inlocal languages and in English. Also, there should beclose interaction and coordination among the variousorganizations involved in coordinating educational andtraining programmes, in order to avoid the duplicationof efforts in training and capacity building.Image: National Institute of HydrologyParticipants from African countries and faculty of the training course on Project Hydrology[ 143 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTWater education and cooperation initiatives atthe National Water Resources Institute, NigeriaDr Olusanjo A. Bamgboye, Executive Director/Chief Executive and Dr Omogbemi O. Yaya, Chief Lecturer,National Water Resources Institute, Kaduna, NigeriaAn integrated water resources management (IWRM)approach to water resources development is effectiveand efficient if genuine cooperation is established amongthe water sector stakeholders. This can only be achieved throughcomprehensive water education at all levels of programmeand project activities. The National Water Resources Institute(NWRI) in Nigeria has initiated capacity building projects andprogrammes at different levels of human resources developmentfor knowledge and skills acquisition in the sector, therebyfostering cooperation among various stakeholders.Water is the engine that drives both the economy and the societybehind it. The tools and measures to manage the interlinkedchallenges of water, energy, food security and environmentalpreservation and achieve sustainable development are containedin IWRM, fully operated at river basin level. The key objective ofIWRM is to re-establish water quality and ecosystem functions. Thisis achieved through improved stormwater management; human andindustrial waste management; flood loss reduction; sedimentationand pollution control; improved drinking water quality;recreation; education; and the introduction of natural ormanmade cropping systems tailored to deliver solutionsat the river basin level. Against the backdrop of theseneeds, set in a human rights-based approach aimedat achieving sufficient, safe, acceptable and affordablewater for personal and domestic uses, the UnitedNations explicitly recognized the human right to waterand sanitation through its Resolution 64/292. A rightsbasedapproach entails prioritizing non-discriminatoryaccess to water, promoting inclusive participation inall decision-making mechanisms, and ensuring theaccountability and legal obligations of public institutions.Therefore locally appropriate, formal andinformal water education at all levels is imperative inorder to understand, appreciate and implement waterrights. Despite the best efforts of governments, IWRMhas not been implemented in most river basins due tolack of human capacity and institutional support. WaterImages: NWRIStudents of one of the 10 secondary schools receiving operational instructions at their meteorological station[ 144 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTinfrastructures are knowledge-driven and require education, trainingand retraining for effectiveness to deliver services and goods.Water education programmesSub-Saharan Africa is in dire need of knowledgeable and skilledpersonnel for sustainable development. The United NationsEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)Leaders’ Forum Background Document (36 C/INFO.15) estimatedthat 2.5 million engineers and technicians will be needed to improveaccess to clean water and sanitation alone in sub-Saharan Africa,aside from other subsectors of water resources development andmanagement. This translates to 500,000 skilled staff needed inNigeria to effectively and sustainably manage water and sanitationfacilities to meet the objectives of the Millennium DevelopmentGoals (MDGs).The World Water Forum 2012 recommended 700 employeesfor an urban water utility to serve 1 million inhabitants, with aratio of 15 per cent managerial staff, 30 per cent technologicalstaff and 55 per cent craftsmen. Water governance practitionersand river basin organizations within the subregion requiretraining and capacity building in integrated river basin management.There is a need for such organizations to come togetherto address issues relating to climate extremes; food and waterscarcity in the region; environmental degradation; transboundaryconflicts on water use and the like. The Regional Centrefor Integrated River Basin Management (RC-IRBM) now establishedat NWRI in Kaduna is a training and research hub for theadvancement of human capacity for the sustainable developmentand management of river basins – in the West African subregionin particular, and the African continent in general. RC-IRBM alsoaims to strengthen networks and cooperation between UNESCOand its affiliates, the Lake Chad Basin Commission, the NigerBasin Commission, the West African Network and other trans-boundary basin organizations in the subregion.RC-IRBM currently hosts the African CoordinationUnit of Hydrology for the Environment, Life andPolicy (HELP) and the Focal Point. Nigeria is envisagedto address these components of UNESCOsustainable development promotions in West Africathrough collaborative research and capacity building.The National Water Resources Capacity BuildingNetwork (NWRCBNet) is a network of selected capacitybuilding institutions in Nigeria, established by NWRIwith support from the World Bank to respond to capacitybuilding demands in IWRM and the global patternfor partnership in human resources development. Theobjectives of NWRCBNet are to:• ensure appropriate and sustainable manpowerdevelopment for water resources development andmanagement throughout the country• strengthen institutions and human capacity throughpartnerships for the successful implementation ofIWRM in Nigeria• enhance cooperation among capacity building institutions(CBIs) in the country for IWRM• facilitate research and demand-driven training andeducation in IWRM among CBIs in Nigeria.RC-IRBM will offer postgraduate diploma and Mastersdegrees in collaboration with Nigerian universitiesin IWRM; sanitation and hygiene promotion; waterquality management; and irrigation and drainagetechnology. Other courses programmed to be offeredinclude dams and reservoir management; hydrogeologyand drilling technology; river and watershedhydraulics; and IWRM at the river basin level.Images: NWRIA RWSSC/JICA field demonstration of groundwater investigation techniques (left) and an institutional assessment study of a community water supply scheme inYobe State, north-eastern Nigeria (right)[ 145 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTIn the past two years RC-IRBM has, in collaboration with UNESCOin Paris, organized two international workshops aimed at the developmentand implementation of modular curricula for tertiary, technicaland vocational water education in IWRM in Nigeria. The workshopsbrought together renowned international water experts and professionalsfrom different scientific backgrounds in Nigeria, Namibia, Sudan,Senegal, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Egypt, Ghana, Serbia, South Korea andChina. The experts put together their experience in water educationaspects and fashioned a common and shared strategy which led to thedevelopment of curricula for water education on IWRM for tertiary,technical and vocational institutions in Nigeria and West Africa.The Jaroslav Cerni Institute has signed a Memorandum ofUnderstanding (MoU) with RC-IRBM for collaboration in researchand staff exchange. The collaborative research study designatesthe Gurara River Basin in north-central Nigeria as a HELP basin.Water demand allocation and management is the main focus ofthe research. RC-IRBM was also represented at the GroundwaterGovernance Regional Consultative and Global GroundwaterMonitoring Network workshops held in Nairobi, Kenya.UNESCO’s Abuja Office has collaborated with RC-IRBM to hold aworkshop on ‘Strengthening the UNESCO International HydrologicalProgramme (IHP) and Man and Biosphere Programme NationalCommittees for effective water governance, biosphere reservationmanagement and biodiversity conservation’. The workshop washosted by RC-IRBM and attended by about 43 participants fromgovernment ministries, departments and agencies, academic institutionsand non-governmental organizations, as well as privateApproaches to skills development in the water sector in Nigeria302520151050Source: NWRIFurther EducationalTraining (FET)Higher EducationalTraining (HET)In service trainingBursary supportInternshipsMentorshipRecognition of prior learning(RPL) short coursesCapacity building strategyand financingOtherindividuals. The main objective of the workshop was tostrengthen the capacities of the national committees toplay active roles and contribute meaningfully to nationaland international issues that relate to water, biodiversityand environmental management.The UNESCO African Regional Office in Nairobi hasinitiated preparation of an African Water ResourcesCapacity Building Programme in line with the frameworkof UNESCO-IHP which follows a recommendation by thethird regional meeting of national IHP committees of sub-Saharan Africa. RC-IRBM has been commissioned by theregional office to coordinate the programme at nationaland regional levels. An MoU to that effect has been signedand the programme execution has commenced.In order to raise and encourage an army of interestedyouths who, as future leaders, will commit themselvesto water-related careers and safeguard our preciousresource, the Nigerian Junior Water Price Competitionwas established. The event brings together young andbright scientists from Nigerian high schools and tertiaryinstitutions to stimulate their interest in solving challengesin the water sector; produce a credible selectionsystem in which the young scientists can produce innovativescientific projects; and encourage them to aspireto compete with young people from other nations inthe area of scientific problem solving for global solutionsto water-related challenges. Furthermore, NWRIhas established meteorological stations in 10 schools inKaduna metropolis for teaching and research purposes.It has encouraged the schools to imbibe the culture ofweather monitoring and data recording and, at the sametime, interpret results and develop skills in weatherforecasting. Youth empowerment training courses arebeing run for unemployed young engineers and scientists,bicycle repairers and other technicians in the areasof water well drilling, fabrication of water well drillingrigs, plumbing works, household water infrastructureand hand pump maintenance.To improve rural water supply and sanitation inNigeria, NWRI is currently collaborating with theJapan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) toexecute a training and research project at the institutecalled ‘The Project for Enhancing the Function ofRural Water Supply and Sanitation Centres for CapacityDevelopment’ (RWSSC). The vision of the centre isto be the hub for rural water supply and sanitation,capacity development and information disseminationin Nigeria. The main objectives of this project are to:• produce capacity development plans of sectororganizations for improved services delivery• provide training courses appropriate to the varioussector stakeholders• develop and produce appropriate training modulesand manuals, monograms and extension materials• establish and effectively manage NWRCBNet• support the production and upgrading ofhydrogeological maps• establish a national water resources websiteaccessible to all stakeholders.[ 146 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTThe overall goal is to see that service delivery of rural water supplyand sanitation is improved in Nigeria through capacity developmentof stakeholders. To date, over 220 participants have benefitedfrom various training programmes including groundwater investigationtechniques; borehole maintenance and rehabilitation; drillingmachinery maintenance; installation and maintenance of handpumps; sanitation and hygiene; community mobilization; alternativewater sources; borehole construction and maintenance; andborehole drilling technology. Equipment comprising a drilling rig,compressor, service trucks, drilling accessories and groundwatergeophysical instruments for effective capacity development andresearch has been received from JICA under this programme.In order to address water resources challenges and support thedevelopment and management of water resources in Africa, the NewPartnership for African Development (NEPAD) has established centresof excellence for the science and technology of water in African subregions.However, for the centres to carry out their functions effectively,it is necessary to examine the capacity development needs of thewater resources sector in the subregions so that interventions can beimplemented based on emerging areas of need. This has necessitateda sector-wide approach for capacity assessment in the West Africansubregion. NWRI, as one of NEPAD’s centres of excellence in WestAfrica, was assigned to carry out a study aimed at identifying skillsand training needs in the Nigerian water sector. NWRI’s experiencein human resources capacity and skills assessments in Nigeria wasbrought to bear in conducting this study. The study’s relevance inhelping to reposition the Nigerian water sector towardsdelivering on the MDGs cannot be over emphasized. Theresults revealed that skills development in the Nigerianwater sector is mainly through in-service training, with fewutilizing further and higher education training. This couldbe attributed to the fact that, apart from those working inthe universities, polytechnics and research institutes, moststaff in the sector are rarely given the opportunity to go forlong-term training courses that will take them away fromtheir working environments for some time.RC-IRBM/NWRI is collaborating with UNESCOin the Hydro free and/or Open software Platform ofExperts (HOPE) programme. The steering committeeis composed of the African Ministers’ Council onWater, the Africa Water Resources Capacity BuildingProgramme, the Southern African Network of WaterCentres of Excellence and the United Nations EconomicCommission for Africa. The executive director/chiefexecutive of NWRI is a member of the committee.Through these projects and programmes, RC-IRBMand NWRI have strategically been integrating thecooperation of stakeholders in the water sector atnational and international levels. These endeavourssupport the effective utilization and management ofwater resources in the West African subregion and theAfrican continent.Images: NWRIA Youth Empowerment Programme field demonstration. Clockwise from top left: borehole pumping test; dismantling a submersible pump;women service the submersible pump; coupling the serviced pump before reinstallation[ 147 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTSustainable management of lakes in MalaysiaZati Sharip, Senior Research Officer, Research Centre for Water Quality and Environment;Saim Suratman, Director, Research Centre for Geohydrology; and Ahmad Jamalluddin Shaaban, Director General,National Hydraulic Research Institute of Malaysia, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, MalaysiaLakes, natural or man-made, are important water resourcesfor Malaysia. These inland water bodies cover an area ofover 10,000 hectares and contain more than 30 billioncubic metres of water. Most of these water bodies have multiplefunctions including the provision of water supply for domestic,industrial and agricultural needs, hydroelectricity generation,flood mitigation, and recreational and tourism destinations.However, deterioration of water quality in Malaysia’s freshwatersystems including lakes, resulting from rapid development withinthe catchment, is a serious concern.According to a preliminary assessment on the status of eutrophicationof lakes in Malaysia, conducted by the National Hydraulic ResearchInstitute of Malaysia (NAHRIM) in collaboration with the Academyof Sciences Malaysia (ASM) in 2005, about 62 per cent of 90 majorlakes that were studied were in a nutrient-rich or eutrophic state,while the rest were categorised as nutrient-balance or mesotrophic.Some of the eutrophic lakes, such as Lake Aman in Selangor andLake Sembrong in Johor, are threatened by algae bloom incidents,while Lake Chini in Pahang is vulnerable to excessivegrowth of aquatic plants. The excess nutrients werelargely induced by point sources and non-point sourcesoriginating from natural and anthropogenic activitieswithin the lake catchment. Concerted efforts in the formof national cooperation among government agencies,departments and private sectors were crucial to addressingthese serious eutrophication issues, and these effortshave been initiated and fostered since 2007.Sustainable lake managementA two-day colloquium among stakeholders on thetheme of Status and Issues of Lakes and ReservoirsManagement in Malaysia was jointly organized byNAHRIM (under the auspices of the Ministry of NaturalResources and Environment or NRE), ASM, the InterAcademy Panel and the Japan Science and TechnologyAgency at NRE in August 2007. Its aim was to advocategreater understanding on the status and issuesImage: Academy of Sciences MalaysiaTemenggor Lake is one of the biggest man-made lakes in Peninsular Malaysia[ 148 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTpertaining to lakes and reservoirs in the country. This national colloquiumwas the first step towards dealing with the issues causing thedegradation of these important inland water resources, providinga platform for meaningful discussion as well as knowledge-sharingamong the various participants. Subsequently, the colloquiumprovided the initial inputs, and enabled further collaboration forconsequent action, towards the formulation of a national frameworkand consolidated plan for sound lake management in Malaysia.A Technical Committee on Lake Management was later jointly establishedby ASM and NAHRIM to move the national agenda forward andarticulate strategies to support the sustainable management of lakesand reservoirs in Malaysia. A framework for action was undertakenin 2008 to establish a comprehensive plan using a multi-stakeholderconsultative planning approach, beginning with a preliminary conceptualframework plan. The first multi-sector workshop involvingstakeholders from government agencies, the public and private sectorsand non-governmental organizations (NGOs) was held at NAHRIMin January 2008 to institute the Conceptual Framework for Lakes andReservoirs Management. The ‘logical framework approach’ was used asa planning instrument to guide stakeholders in the workshop in theiranalysis of the prevailing situation and any proposed measures to beundertaken. The final conceptual framework Plan provided the inputfor the draft of the vision and mission statement of the Strategic Plan.Preparation of more detailed component plans was synthesizedfrom thematic position papers which were subsequently consolidatedto further refine the conceptual framework Plan. A fresh round ofstakeholder consultations was held for each of the six themes: governance,management, research and development, capacity building,information management and community stakeholder participation.These consultations helped to refine the earlier findings and formulateplans of action for each component. The final National StrategicPlan for the Sustainable Development and Management of Lakes andReservoirs were finally developed, based on the analysisand findings in the conceptual framework plan and sixcomponent plans.This strategic plan, which incorporates the IntegratedLake Basin Management (ILBM) principles, was completedin 2009 and set the direction for future concerted actionby all stakeholders to sustainably manage the inland waterresources in the country. The national strategic plan wastabled to the National Water Resources Council in 2012,where the strategies were deliberated and endorsed forimplementation. Among the national strategies advocatedin the national strategic plan is the setting up of a steeringcommittee at federal level and a lake managementcommittee at the state level, to oversee the implementationof lake management based on an integrated lake basinapproach throughout the country. As with other countriesthat comprise federated nations, fragmented authority andconflicting mandates are common challenges in Malaysia.The national lake and reservoir management committeewill become a platform to improve coordination and cooperationbetween different ministries, federal agencies andwater-related institutions. The committee will also lookinto the provision of legislation, sufficient financing andpolitical commitment through the development of policieson lakes. At the state level, local coordination is beingstrengthened through a central state committee that willaddress lake issues at the catchment scale by engagingwith stakeholders and communities on matters related toland and water in its jurisdiction. A detailed plan of actionfor managing lakes and reservoirs is also being prepared toprovide a road map for implementing ILBM for the healthof the country’s inland water resources.Image: NAHRIMImage: NAHRIMChini Lake, the second largest freshwater natural lake in Malaysia. The lake shoresare inhabited by the aborigine Jakun tribePerdana Lake in Perdana Botanical Gardens, the oldest and mostpopular park in Kuala Lumpur[ 149 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTImage: Putrajaya CorporationPutrajaya Lake has attracted recreational, sports and tourism activitiesIn preparation for ILBM implementation, the development of a lakebrief began in 2009, comprising data on the basic features and environmentalstate of the lakes and information on management and governancechallenges. The lake brief was developed based on the template and questionnaireintroduced by the International Lake Environment Committee(ILEC) in 2008. To ensure the successful development of lake briefs,NAHRIM conducted meetings where lake managers were identified inconsultation with the stakeholders, and were subsequently guided ontemplate and lake brief requirements. Suitable avenues for discussionand presentation in the form of meetings and seminars were held toenable the lake managers to present their lake brief. A total of 26 lakebriefs – covering 28 lakes across the country – have been prepared todate by various stakeholders and compiled by NAHRIM. The lake briefs,which provide an analysis of the state of basin governance for the respectivelake, have become an important component of the ILBM platformprocess, which addresses the six pillars of lake basin governance:• institution• finance• policies• stakeholder participation• technology• information.The lake brief assessment not only provides baseline informationon the health of the water bodies, but also enables lake managers toimprove their management approach by prescribing effective managementsolutions to overcome lake issues and monitor their health.Stakeholder participation is crucial for the success of a managementapproach in any type of water body. Lake communities are an essentialpart of many lakes as they inhabit many of these natural or man-madesystems. In natural lakes, native communities have been living in andaround the lakes for a long time and are thus dependent on the lakefor their livelihoods. In man-made lakes, especially inurban areas, most of the lakes have been developed asrecreational areas where surrounding communities canspend their leisure time. Understanding the importanceof community participation, stakeholders including NGOshave been engaged in the colloquium and included inmany of the workshops, and their role has been incorporatedas one of the national strategies for sustainablelake management. In some lakes, community stakeholdercommittees such as ‘friends of the lake’ (also known as‘rakan tasik’ in Malay) have been established by NGOs.These committees should be promoted to assist in themanagement of the lakes and their landscape.Sustainable management action requires sound andscientifically-based information. In order to enhancethe management of lake data, a central National LakesInventory (NLI) was developed by NAHRIM in 2007based on inputs and recommendations from workshops.The inventory comprises summary information and datafor each lake, and assessments based on the preliminaryeutrophication study. The structure of the NLI was adaptedfrom the World Lakes Database developed by ILEC. Anintroduction to this lake inventory, which is known as theNational Lake Information Database (NLID), was presentedto stakeholders – mainly lake managers and researchers– so they could make contributions to the database. Thelake inventory has been enhanced to become a lake databasewhich applies spatial data in geographical informationsystem format to support non-spatial data storage. Thisenhanced NLID involves cooperation, with data input andupdates performed by various lake managers while the databaseis manned by NAHRIM. The database will eventually[ 150 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTLake brief development in MalaysiaLakePutrajayaChiniKenyirLoagan BunutTimah TasohPedu-MudaBukit MerahSg. TeripChenderohBeraPaya IndahSembrongBerisSungai SelangorKlang GatesRingletBatang AiBabagonDurian TunggalLangatTasik SubangBukit KwongPergauJorTaipingFRIMStateFederal TerritoriesPahangTerengganuSarawakPerlisKedahPerakNegeri SembilanPerakPahangSelangorJohorKedahSelangorSelangorPahangSarawakSabahMelakaSelangorSelangorKelantanKelantanPerakPerakSelangorLake manager; agencies involvedPutrajaya CorporationThe National University of Malaysia (UKM)Universiti Putra Malaysia, Terengganu Tengah Development Authority(KETENGAH) and Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB)Sarawak Department of ForestUniversiti Sains Malaysia (USM)Muda Agricultural Development Authority (MADA)Kerian District Department of Irrigation and Drainage (DID)Syarikat Air Negeri Sembilan Sdn. Bhd. (SAINS)Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB)Department of Wildlife and National Parks (PERHILITAN)Department of Wildlife and National Parks (PERHILITAN)Department of Irrigation and Drainage (DID)Department of Irrigation and Drainage (DID)Selangor Water Management Authority (LUAS)Selangor Water Management Authority (LUAS)Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB)Sarawak Forestry DepartmentDepartment of Irrigation and Drainage, SabahSyarikat Air Melaka BerhadSelangor Water Management Authority (LUAS)Selangor Water Management Authority (LUAS)Department of Irrigation and Drainage (DID)Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB)Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB)Taiping Municipal CouncilForest Research Institute Malaysia (FRIM)Source: NAHRIMbe shared with the public, including researchers and students, to promoteresearch activities and awareness towards the implementation of ILBM.A way forwardAs lakes are an essential component of national water resources, thisintegrated basin management approach is a way forward to deal withthe severity of the eutrophication issue faced by the inland waterbodies in Malaysia. The national cooperative efforts that are beingfostered could be strengthened to support a holisticapproach to water management in other water bodies,such as rivers and coastal waters, in keeping with theNational Water Resources Policy. The ILBM approach isnot only able to contribute to the socioeconomic developmentof the country towards achieving developednation status; at the same time it also ensures conservationof this unique ecosystem.[ 151 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTFree open source software as a toolfor water cooperationCicero Bley, Coordinator, International Centre on HydroinformaticsInformation technology for geographic information systems(GIS) has remained somewhat hermetic and inaccessible tomost non-specialists. The high costs of acquiring operatinglicences also inhibit the use of this type of technology for manyinitiatives. Free open source software (FOSS) provides alternativesto the universal use of GIS, but is often surrounded byprejudices related to low credibility regarding security. FOSSoffers benefits for people in developing countries, includingfacilitating access to increasing ownership of information andcommunications technologies for human development.The FOSS model provides alternative tools and processes with whichpeople can create, exchange, share and exploit applications and knowledgeefficiently and effectively. In addition to the fact that FOSS can beused in GIS, there are huge possibilities for it in embedded systems, interms of lowering the cost of the intelligent systems that enable these.This characteristic can be crucial to the deployment of short-termequipment in industries and services that use computer circuits.It is important to consider that activities using information technologyentail complex, non-polluting, labour-saving and high value-addedend products, even in the case of non-proprietary software – a type ofdevelopment that is desirable in any region of the world.The networks of developers that form around each softwareare practically voluntary, communicate using theInternet, and are called on to participate in the events oftheir own groups only on specific occasions. To enableaccess to free codes, it is necessary that the interestedcontact centres and related professional developers arecommitted to sharing advances in relation to the software’sapplication to new situations. In other words, theonly payment required to obtain FOSS is a commitmentto sharing the results, thus forming a network of professionals,each committed to improving the work of othersin an undeniable demonstration of solidarity.Applications of FOSS in water management are ofgreat value. There is nothing more efficient in watermanagement than the conscious involvement of aninformed society that coexists with the river. A minimallytrained operator can operate FOSS and locate allactivities in the watershed with a potential impact onwater quality. Each activity has its own characteristics,which are registered in a database and georeferenced.Image: CIHGroups of trainees often gather in churches, clubs and public buildings to take part in CIH training[ 152 ]
WATER EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTThese are related by the operating system software, and theprocessed data is used to inform a list of activities in differentsegments of the watershed territory. The stored and geoprocesseddata composes a set of information that can be used on differentscales for a range of regional planning activities. Thus, FOSS can beused to draw up plans for watershed conservation, to monitor theirphysical and financial execution, and then to monitor the results,facilitating the implementation of corrective measures to establisha cycle of continuous improvement. In relation to monitoring – acrucial matter in watershed planning – FOSS enables, organizes andfacilitates community involvement in effective programmes, suchas the monitoring of benthic macroinvertebrates and establishingthe microfauna of rivers, as indicators of the quality of their water.The programs developed in FOSS can be made available on the web,reducing storage costs and maintenance and universalizing access.Another important aspect is capacity building for the use of FOSS,both in developing the software and customizing it for a specific use.The International Centre on Hydroinformatics (CIH) has a good andfunctional infrastructure, and a team of young and dedicated professionalscommitted to the development of FOSS. The centre has alreadycustomized several GIS programs for communities with varied degreesof capacity to manage software. Training is a major concern, and CIHhas an available computer lab with the capacity to cater to groups of25 students. In addition to theoretical knowledge, students finish thecourse with almost-complete systems to apply in real situations in theirregions. The training is done by distance learning, using the web, asmost of the trainees are volunteers who only have their spare time toempower themselves. Collective rooms can be established with institutionssuch as churches, clubs and public buildings so that students canlearn in groups, which always produces good results.Based on this, CIH has been requested to cooperate with other countriesin Latin America, in the management of water resources and ofrenewable energy in microgeneration systems with management toolsbased on FOSS technologies. This offers decision makers, managers,planners, teachers and students the ability to identifyvarious human activities and their relationships witha water source within its own territories. In the case ofenergy sources, the tools are able to identify the relationshipsbetween available sources of renewable energy andpotential consumers in the same territory. Because themanagement tools are made in FOSS, they enable accesseven for managers who have little familiarity with GIS.Touched by the technological gap that separatesAfrica from the rest of the world, the United NationsEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO) has called on international experts inFOSS, creating a committee to suggest the best optionsto African coaches. A continent the size of Africa,living with the paradox of shortage in an abundance ofwater, food and energy, needs instruments that facilitatemanagement more than any other. The UNESCOInternational Hydrological Programme (IHP) Hydrofree and/or Open-source software Platform of Experts(HOPE) initiative aims to establish FOSS developmentand the dissemination of innovative practices in watermanagement. These can be built into the Africa WaterVision for 2025, helping prepare people to take onthe green jobs that will certainly be generated by aninitiative of this magnitude. CIH recently joined theUNESCO-IHP HOPE programme, in an initiative toprovide African countries with GIS tools in open sourcesoftware. This is an opportunity to offer to the Africancountries the same access to GIS that developed countriesenjoy. CIH is part of UNESCO’s Category 2 Centrenetwork, and is honoured to be assisting UNESCO inhelping African managers and technicians to observethe territories in which they live, and manage the waterresources they need.Image: CIHSharing FOSS development and innovative practices in water management can help prepare people to take on the green jobs that will begenerated by the UNESCO-IHP HOPE initiative[ 153 ]
IVFinancing Cooperation
FINANCING COOPERATIONRegional cooperation in the water and sanitationsector: Latin America and the CaribbeanMiguel Campo Llopis, Anamaria Nunez and Jorge Ducci, Inter-American Development BankSince its creation in 1959, the Inter-American DevelopmentBank (IDB or ‘the bank’) has provided financial and technicalsupport for the improvement of water and sanitationservices in Latin America and the Caribbean. From 2007, with thecreation of the Water and Sanitation Division, IDB has workedjointly with the countries in the region 1 for the fulfilment of theMillennium Development Goals (MDGs) and beyond; to ensureuniversal, quality access to suitable water and sanitation services.With regard to the water and sanitation sector, the MDGs are tohalve the number of people without access to safe drinking water 2sources and improved sanitation 3 by 2015, using 1990 as the baseyear. The most recent data on the whole region from 2010 showthat the goal of 93 per cent of access to safe drinking water sourceshas been overcome, but the goal of ensuring improved sanitationhas not (coverage in the region is 79 per cent and the goal is 84 percent). These coverage levels translate into 34 million people withoutaccess to safe drinking water sources and almost 124 million peoplewithout access to improved sanitation. 4In terms of funding, IDB’s commitment has been translatedinto financial support tools such as investment loansand donations, for a sum of around US$7 billion. Theseresources have been allocated to funding activities such asthe expansion and rehabilitation of water supply networksand sewage; basic rural sanitation and water systems;wastewater treatment plants; works for flood preventionand drainage; and construction of sanitary landfills.In order to be able to respond adequately to thedemands of countries in the context of climate change,the bank has reinforced its knowledge product rangeto emphasize issues related to the political economyand water resource management, strengthening of thesectoral institutional framework and incorporation ofnew work methodologies, among others. In addition,the IDB has put its technical and financial capacity atthe service of regional dialogue. It has established strategicalliances with other multilateral institutions andbilateral agencies, and increased the impact of the inter-The evolution of drinking water and sanitation coverage in Latin America and the Caribbean, and the MDG for 201510080Safe drinking waterImproved sanitationPer cent6040201990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015Source: IDB[ 156 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONventions and support processes to governments in the region in theirinvestment challenges and new opportunities. 5The Water Fund: an example of cooperationIn 2007 a new stage of cooperation took place in the water and sanitationsector in Latin America and the Caribbean, between the SpanishGovernment and the IDB. The Spanish authorities created the US$1.5billion Cooperation Fund for Water and Sanitation (FCAS), an unprecedentedinitiative in this region. 6 The Spanish Government and IDBcombined both their financial and technical capacities in a strategic visionto enable the commitment of donors and recipient countriesto achieving the MDG.Therefore, on 22 October 2008, an agreementwas signed. Spain, through the Spanish Agency forInternational Cooperation for Development (AECID),and the IDB, through the Water and Sanitation Division,agreed to work jointly to solve the region’s challengeswith regard to water and sanitation by means of theFCAS in Latin America and the Caribbean (FECASALC)Fund managed by the IDB. The agreement was signedParaguayIn the Republic of Paraguay poverty affectsalmost 35.6 per cent of the population,with 19.4 per cent in a situation of extremepoverty. Poverty levels are related to lowlevels of education and development, andmostly to a lack of access to means ofproduction and basic social services suchas health, education and sanitation. Povertyaffects urban and rural areas equally, butextreme poverty mainly affects rural areas,where 24.4 per cent are in this situation.InterventionsTwo operations aim to increase access todrinking water and sanitation, focusing on:• rural and native communities with lessthan 2,000 inhabitants (all provincesexcept Neembucu and Misiones)• indigenous and poor peoples of theChaco and intermediate cities of theOriental region.They will be executed by the National Servicefor Environmental Sanitation and the Ministryof Public Works and Communications.MilestonesParaguay is one country where the Fund’scomprehensive approach is havingmore impact. In addition to the ruraland indigenous operation, a monitoringsystem for rural systems has beendeveloped through mobile telephony.One of the impact studies for measuringthe effect of water supply and sanitationin rural systems is being carried out.The other operation, conducted inintermediate cities, will be executedshortly. Here, the unconventionalsanitation model known as condominialwill be implemented, which has alloweda 25 per cent increase in the number ofbeneficiaries.Paraguay is one country where the Fund’s comprehensiveapproach is having more impactFunding (total US$148 m) US$ (millions) Per cent of totalFund donation 100 67IDB loan 32 21Local contribution 16 12Image: IDBHaitiThe level of access to drinking water andsanitation services in Haiti is among thelowest in Latin America and the Caribbean.In general terms, the situation of Haiti’swater and sanitation sector is alarming:only 8.5 per cent of households areconnected to a water distribution systemand sanitation services are practicallynon-existent, with only 30 per cent of thepopulation having access to them.InterventionsFour operations are aimed at providingdrinking water and sanitation services:• intervention in six intermediate cities:Saint-Marc, Port-De Paix, Les Cayes,Jacmel, Ouanaminthe and Cap-Haïtien• strengthening of service provision capacityof the Autonomous Metropolitan DrinkingWater Station of Port-au-Prince Central• improving the quality of life and sanitaryconditions of the rural communities inthe department of Artibonite• contributing to the Cholera Inter-SectorResponse Strategy adopted by theGovernment with a view to reducingmorbidity and mortality.These will be executed by the DirectionNationale de l’Eau Potable et del’Assainissement.MilestonesThe strategy for Haiti has been conceivedfrom a comprehensive point of view. Apartfrom working in rural areas, intermediatecities and Port-au-Prince, great effortsare being made towards reforming thesector. This reform was described in Haiti’sFramework Law on Drinking Water andSanitation, passed in 2009. It involvessector restructuring at national level, whichis being conducted with the support of thefund. In addition to bank-managed funds,AECID has an additional US$100 million.Haiti is one of the best examples of acomplementary and harmonized approachto resources, where the interventions ofboth IDB and AECID come together as one.Water and sanitation service provision capacity is beingstrengthened in Port-au-PrinceFunding (total US$119 m) US$ (millions) Per cent of totalFund donation 70 58IDB donation 49 42Image: IDB[ 157 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONBoliviaDespite the great efforts made in recent years,Bolivia still has one of the lowest water andsanitation coverage levels in the continent. Inorder to address this, in 2008 the Governmentdeveloped the National Plan for BasicSanitation, which recognizes access to waterservices as a universal right. The plan:• holds the state responsible for theprovision of services• provides that services will respond touniversality, accountability, accessibility,continuity, quality and efficiency criteria aswell as to equitable and necessary tariffswith social participation and control• recognizes cultural and ancestral uses• demands that the state and populationconserve and protect water resourcesand use them in a sustainable way.Both of the Fund’s operations in Bolivia areconducted in this context.InterventionsTwo operations aim to provide drinkingwater and sanitation services:• Periurban Program 1• a rural programme in small localities.These are executed by the Ministry ofthe Environment and Water, the NationalProductivity and Social InvestmentFund, and the National Service for theSustainability of Basic Sanitation Services.MilestonesSuccess in the scope, execution andstrategy followed in Periurban Program 1has motivated IDB to finish preparing thesecond stage with the aim of increasing thescope of the interventions under the samescheme of work. In addition to the Fund’speriurban interventions, work is beingdone with rural communities with less than2,000 inhabitants and small localitieswith a population of 2,000-10,000people. These two operations enable theinterventions to focus on segments of thepopulation with lower levels of access.Finally, a large investment in institutionalstrengthening is being made with theaim of providing support to the country’sinstitutional framework in order to reinforcethe interventions of the national policy.Interventions in Bolivia focus on segments of the populationwith lower levels of access to water and sanitation servicesFunding (total US$140 m) US$ (millions) Per cent of totalFund donation 100 71IDB donation 40 29Image: IDBalmost five years ago and during this time a model of work andshared effort has been built which has borne fruit throughout theregion.From the start, the goal of the initiative’s leaders was to create aninstrument that was more than just a transfer of funds. On one hand,work has been done with the Fund recipient countries to identifyactions that guarantee a greater incidence in rural and periurbanareas, both of which are defined by the Fund as priority areas ofintervention. On the other hand, mechanisms have been developedto put into practice the cooperation of both institutions.More specifically, Fund investments are integrated into a largerdynamic which aims to have an impact at the sectoral level, focusingboth on policy and execution. The main target of these investmentsis vulnerable populations in recipient countries, focusing on servicequality and sustainability. In addition, by leveraging resources andcoordinating with other funds, this initiative promotes comprehensiveprogrammes to boost sanitation and human rights.At the beginning of 2010, the implementation of eight operations, alongwith the preparation of 13 others funded by FECASALC and managedby IDB, began. Coordination instruments were designed between thedifferent parties 7 in order to guarantee sustainable implementation ofthe operations as well as harmonization in the intervention strategies.Additionally, at the beginning of 2011, FECASALC started tolaunch knowledge management products to complement the operationswith innovative initiatives that promoted sustainable water andsanitation systems in the region. Studies have been carried out tomeasure the impact of actions on the beneficiary populations’ health;the use of technology for a better knowledge of the rural systems statehas been promoted; methodologies have been defined to incorporategender perspective in the programmes in a more effective way; anda strategy has been launched for the promotion of unconventionalsanitation models with the purpose of promoting sustainabilityat a lower cost and, therefore, to a higher numberof beneficiaries.By means of this model of cooperation between institutionswhich unites objectives, efforts, resources andcommitments, we have made it to 2013. Nowadays,FECASALC has 20 operations running and one in preparation.The portfolio managed by the bank is worthmore than US$1.112 million. 8 FECASALC is active in12 countries in the region, and six studies have beenlaunched to promote knowledge management.The challenges that we face are great and the effort madesince the Fund’s formation must be continued over thecoming years in order to finish the task jointly taken onby IDB and AECID. However, this model of cooperationbetween the bank and the Spanish Government can beconsidered as a milestone for both institutions. The Fundhas placed the rural area back at the centre of policies in theregion, and this has required a mutual learning betweenAECID and IDB as well as the countries involved, in orderto be able to approach those actions in a sustainable way.It is worth mentioning that the existence of the Fundhas had an impact on the sector in the region and mayserve as a reference when looking for synergies betweendevelopment institutions that allow an increase inimpact, efficiency and sustainability of actions. Only byuniting efforts between parties, sharing instruments andmethodologies, defining a joint dialogue with beneficiarycountries and integrating the communities in theprocesses, can we expect actions that guarantee thereduction of poverty in our region.[ 158 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONPoverty reduction and economictransformation through water cooperationSering Jallow, Director, Water and Sanitation Department and African Water Facility, African Development BankThe Africa Water Vision 2025 provides an importantframework for water cooperation in Africa. It envisages“an Africa where there is an equitable and sustainableuse and management of water resources for poverty alleviation,socioeconomic development, regional cooperation andthe environment.” However, more than 12 years after itsadoption the vision remains unfulfilled due mainly to highwater variability, competing demands on national budgets,high costs of water infrastructure and their long implementationtimes. Africa is using only about 5 per cent of its annualrenewable water resources and less than 10 per cent of itsirrigation and hydropower potentials. Only around half ofAfrican countries are likely to achieve the water MillenniumDevelopment Goal (MDG), and less than 10 are likely toachieve the sanitation MDG, with climate change causingincreasing havoc through more frequent floods and droughtsat high cost to African economies.The overarching objective of the African Development Bank (AfDB)is to contribute to sustainable economic development and socialprogress in Africa. Its activities in the water sector are a vital componentfor achieving the economic transformation envisaged in thebank’s recently launched Ten-Year Strategy for 2013-2022. Thestrategy focuses on two objectives to improve the quality of Africa’seconomic growth: inclusive growth and a transition to green growth.Massingir Dam, MozambiqueImage: AfDBIn 48 years of supporting Africa’s development, cooperationand collaboration have been central to AfDB’sefforts to leverage the finance needed to bridge thecontinent’s infrastructure deficit, as well as to providepolicy guidance, technical assistance and build thecapacity needed to support development efforts. AfDB’swater sector cooperation framework includes collectiveaction at various scales ranging from global andAfrica-wide initiatives to project-level activities. Thebank also engages with its partners through differentforms of collaborative activities including advocacy,networking for information sharing, coordination ofproject activities, and more structured partnershipssuch as participation in programmatic operations insome countries. This cooperation has contributed tomuch of the progress on the continent.Collaboration at regional levelAfDB serves on the Board of Governors of the WorldWater Council and collaborates on advocacy, policyand strategic issues with organizations and partnershipssuch as Sanitation and Water for All (SWA),the International Rescue Committee, the Rural WaterSupply Network, WaterAid, Oxfam, the African CivilSociety Network on Water and Sanitation and theAfrican Water Association. It works closely with theUnited Nations Secretary-General’s Advisory Board andparticipates in a number of global thematic dialoguessuch as the Water, Food and Energy Nexus dialogue,Water and Disasters, and the Post-2015 SustainableDevelopment Goals agenda.Recognizing the need for strong political leadershipof the water sector in Africa, AfDB supportedthe establishment of the African Ministers’ Councilon Water (AMCOW) as a body of the African Unionto lead the dialogue in the sector. It continues towork with donors to support AMCOW’s advocacy forincreased prioritization and leveraging change in thewater sector. This includes supporting the organizationof the African Water Week series, leading Africa’spreparations and participation in the different WorldWater Forum events.Much of Africa’s water resources are shared acrossnational boundaries, making interstate cooperation aprerequisite for effective water management and avoidingpotential conflicts. AfDB sees regional infrastructure[ 159 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONas an important means of supporting Africa’s development and iscollaborating with the African Union Commission, the UnitedNations Economic Commission for Africa and the New Partnershipfor Africa’s Development (NEPAD) Planning and CoordinatingAgency in the development and implementation of the Programmefor Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA). The water-relatedcomponents of the programme target the development of multipurposedams, exploitation of extensive transboundary aquifers,and capacity building for Africa’s lake and river basin organizationsso they can plan and develop hydraulic infrastructure to improveAfrica’s water and food security. PIDA allows for developing thecontinent’s huge hydropower potential for its industrial transformation,as well as increasing access to safe drinking water for addressinghealth, education and gender-related issues. Water infrastructure isalso contributing to mitigation of the water-related challenges posedby climate change and variability.In order to address the very low access rates for rural watersupply and sanitation (RWSS) services, AfDB initiated the RuralWater Supply and Sanitation Initiative (RWSSI) in 2003. RWSSI isa regional initiative which provides a common collaboration frameworkbetween African governments and international developmentpartners for resource mobilization and investment to meet the MDGsand Africa Water Vision 2025 targets. By the end of 2012, AfDB hadinvested about US$1.3 billion in financing 37 rural water supply andsanitation programmes in 27 countries. Several donors are supportingthe initiative through their bilateral or multilateral channels, andan estimated US$4.2 billion has been leveraged through the supportof other donors and the African governments. This collaborativeeffort has so far contributed to bringing access to rural water supplyand sanitation to 56 million and 41 million people respectively.Regional water initiatives supported by AfDB include thoseunder the East African Community, the Economic Communityof West African States, the Intergovernmental Authority onDevelopment, the Southern African Development Community(SADC) and all the major river and lake basins (Nile, Volta,Congo, Niger, Senegal, Gambia, Lake Chad and Lake Victoria).These initiatives involve developing integrated water resourcesmanagement (IWRM) plans, financing feasibility studies, capacitybuilding activities and investments. AfDB is leading resourcemobilization initiatives for a number of regional and subregionalentities such as the Permanent Inter-State Committee for DroughtControl in the Sahel and the Lake Chad Basin Commission. InEast Africa AfDB is collaborating with the United Nations HumanSettlements Programme (UNHABITAT) and the Lake VictoriaBasin Commission through a major regional water and sanitationprogramme that targets 15 urban centres in the immediate vicinityof the lake in the five riparian countries. The bank is also workingwith SADC to support three of its member countries (Tanzania,Zimbabwe and Mozambique) through the Shared WatercoursesSupport Project for Buzi, Save and Ruvuma River Basins.Collaboration at country levelAt the country level, cooperation with regional member countries(RMCs) and their development partners plays an important role inthe way AfDB supports the water sector. Many of the 62 water andsanitation projects in 35 countries with about US$3 billion of bankfinancing in the current portfolio were developed in collaborationwith other donors or are co-financed with them. Through its decentralizedstructure and in line with the Paris Declaration principlesAfDB collaboration at country levelA joint sector review meeting in UgandaMali – AfDB currently leads a group of 14 donorswithin the consultative framework that brings togethergovernment and donors to jointly support the nationalwater and sanitation programme (Programme Sectorield’Eau et Assainissment). The framework is based on athree-year rolling medium-term expenditure frameworkthat establishes the financing required to meet sectorobjectives, takes into account existing government anddonor commitments and identifies the financing gaps tobe addressed by partners.Sierra Leone – AfDB is a member of the DevelopmentPartners forum, which enables information sharingand discussion of issues regarding support to SierraLeone’s development agenda, including the water andsanitation sector. The bank is now working closelywith the Government, the Department for InternationalDevelopment (DfID), the Global Environment Fund andRWSSI Trust Fund partners to support a Rural WaterSupply and Sanitation Project with an estimated cost ofUS$43 million. DfID’s funding will be channelled throughAfDB’s Fragile States Facility.Tanzania – AfDB and other partners (KfW, WorldBank, Agence Française de Développement, DfID,UNICEF, European Union, Millennium ChallengeCorporation, Water Aid and the governments of Belgium,Japan, South Korea and Norway) are supporting thewater sector SWAp through the Government’s WaterSector Development Programme. AfDB funding isearmarked for rural water supply and sanitation.Uganda – within Uganda’s broader donorcoordination framework and SWAp for the WSS sector,AfDB is a member of the Water and Sanitation SectorDevelopment Partners Group which enables the bank, incollaboration with several other development partners,to jointly enhance the efficiency, effectiveness andcoherence of their assistance to the sector. AfDB iscurrently involved in joint technical sector reviews for theUganda Water and Sanitation Project and is co-financingthe Kampala Sanitation Programme with KfW.Image: AfDB[ 160 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONCollaboration with the World BankCollaboration between AfDB, the World Bank and WSPwas formalized in 2006 and led to a WSP liaison officebeing opened at AfDB headquarters in Tunis in 2007for a three-year period. Collaboration during this periodincluded the following.On knowledge sharing and capacity building, jointworkshops were held and joint publications produced.At the operational level, there were joint supervisionmissions with appraisals in eight countries and mutualcontributions to project preparation. There were also 12joint sector reviews, joint financing of budgetary reviewsin three countries and co-financing of water sectorprojects in seven countries.AfricaSan 2008 led to a joint review of the sanitationand hygiene status in 32 countries and the eThekwiniDeclaration with its call for country action plans toaddress the sanitation MDG. The first Africa Water Weekresulted in outputs endorsed by the African Union andG8 summits. AfDB and WSP contributed to the launch ofthe Pan-African Monitoring and Evaluation Assessmentin Tunis in 2006. Country Status Overviews werecarried out in 16 countries and a Sector InformationManagement Workshop was held in Nairobi in 2007.Credit rating assessments were produced for sevenAfrican utilities with a view to contributing towardsincreased operational efficiency and preparing waterutilities for accessing market finance. WSP and AWFalso supported the setting up of the Water OperatorsPartnership – Africa.AfDB is continuing its cooperation with the WorldBank on WSS issues. Current plans include jointfinancing of the Port Harcourt Urban Water Supplyand Sanitation Project in Nigeria, joint support for awater sector SWAp in Ethiopia and a joint programmeevaluation mission in Tanzania.A working session between AfDB and WSP in TunisImage: AfDBon aid effectiveness, AfDB is playing an increasingly prominent rolein donor coordination activities and in joint sector operations suchas sector reviews, especially in those countries where a sector-wideapproach (SWAp) is being implemented.AfDB values cooperation with non-governmental organizations(NGOs) in view of their positive impacts on project developmentand implementation. For example, on the Kibera Water Supplyand Sanitation Programme in Kenya, NGOs with expertise inslum areas are engaged in capacity building and coordination ofthe construction of water and sewer lines and ablution blocks. TheNGOs’ intervention has enabled the bank and the water utility tobetter address a number of social issues including the resettlementof displaced persons. Cooperation with NGOs is also common onrural water supply and sanitation projects financed by AfDB, as theyare often involved in working with communities on project planningand implementation.Cooperation through trust fundsTrust funds provide an additional technical and financial instrumentfor cooperation and support, complementing AfDB’s traditionallending activities. The Water and Sanitation Department (OWAS)manages three trust funds, each contributing in different waystowards the bank’s objectives.The Multi Donor Water Partnership Programme (MDWPP), establishedin 2002, has been supported by three donors (Canada, Denmarkand the Netherlands) and has the broad objective of operationalizingAfDB’s IWRM policy within the bank and in the RMCs. The MDWPPsupports the work of several sector departments includingOWAS, Agriculture and Agribusiness, NEPAD andRegional Integration, and Energy, Environment andClimate Change (ONEC). The MDWPP has contributedsignificantly towards strengthening AfDB’s IWRMcapacity, building awareness of IWRM issues within andoutside the bank, improving knowledge on IWRM issuesand facilitating sector dialogue.As part of its role in leveraging funds for Africa’s watersector, AfDB supported AMCOW to establish the AfricanWater Facility (AWF) in 2004. AWF represents a majorcooperation effort between 15 bilateral donors, multilateralfinancial institutions, foundations and Africangovernments (Algeria, Australia, Austria, the Bill andMelinda Gates Foundation, Burkina Faso, Canada,Denmark, the European Union, France, Norway, Senegal,Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and AfDB). It ishosted and managed by the bank. AWF mainly supportsproject preparation designed to attract follow-up investment.By the end of 2012 it had attracted EUR20 forevery euro invested, bringing the total financing leveragedto EUR714 million.AWF is implementing much of AfDB’s work intransboundary water resources management (TWRM)across the continent by promoting the developmentof cooperative legislative frameworks for effectiveTWRM, strengthening inter-basin and intra-basin[ 161 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONImage: SwecoThe RWSSI is in line with the bank’s emphasis on inclusivenessand is an effective means for building resilienceand climate proofing against drought.Cooperation with multilateral organizationsAfDB views collaboration with other multilateralorganizations as important for supporting jointcountry-level and regional activities, eliminatingduplication of efforts and avoiding conflictingapproaches. Within the framework of the bank’scollaboration agreements with the United Nations andthe World Bank, the water department has developedjoint working arrangements with several agencies,notable among which are those with UNHABITAT,the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) andthe Water and Sanitation Programme (WSP) of theWorld Bank .Water sector cooperation between AfDB and UNICEFfocuses on the RWSS subsector, leveraging the respectivecomparative advantages in the following areas:• supporting continental and regional initiatives• access to sanitation (including water, sanitation andhygiene in schools)• sustaining services and behaviours• monitoring and knowledge management.AfDB collaboration with SADC - Shared Watercourses Support Project (Buzi RiverBasin, Mozambique)cooperation and coordination among basin states, and supportingstrategic and investment planning and resource mobilization inbasin development organizations. AWF support for strengtheningthe African Network of Basin Organizations is a good exampleof this work. The facility also contributes towards AfDB’s effortsto create a favourable environment for effective and sustainableinvestments and promoting water sector knowledge. In additionto traditional partnerships with governments and donor agencies,AWF’s financing procedures provide opportunities for increasingcooperation with private operators, financiers, professionalnetworks, academia, NGOs and civil society.AfDB is cooperating with a number of donors includingFrance, Switzerland, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, Italyand Burkina Faso through the RWSSI Trust Fund in order toadd a quality dimension to the RWSSI through focused supportfor the ‘softer’ aspects of RWSS implementation. The trust fundaddresses issues such as:• improving RWSS governance and enabling environment• ensuring that projects and programmes to be funded havethe requisite institutional arrangements and capacities forsustainable service delivery• providing a platform for knowledge management,communication and sharing good practice at the regional andnational levels• selectively and strategically providing investment funds forrural water supply and sanitation for fragile and post-conflictAfrican states.The working arrangements include regular cross-pollinationmeetings and joint plans at country level.Looking aheadTransforming Africa’s economic fortunes in a waythat includes the poor can only be achieved throughextensive long-term cooperation among the variousactors. AfDB will therefore continue to pursue itsmultilevel and multifaceted cooperation and collaborationstrategy through:• participing in global and Africa-wide sector dialogue• engaging with various partners in the developmentand execution of its lending operations at regionaland country levels• cooperating with donors through special purposetrust funds• partnering with other multilateral organizations.• collaborating with unique knowledge institutionsthat help governments accelerate reforms thatensure sustainable water resources managementin support of long term national development andeconomic growth.The bank is also enhancing its efforts to help Africancountries create the enabling environment that will attractprivate sector financing to bridge the financing gap.Collaboration with other organizations is a dynamicprocess making it necessary to engage in continuousreassessment in meeting joint objectives and aspirations.AfDB therefore welcomes the opportunitiesavailed by the International Year of Water Cooperationto renew its commitment to cooperation as an essentialelement of the international development agenda.[ 162 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONWaterCredit: solving the global water crisisthrough community collaboration, governmentengagement and economic stimulationGary White, CEO; Stephen Harris Jr, Grants Manager; and Rosemary Gudelj, Manager of Public Affairs, Water.orgThe global water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) crisis isacute. According to the Joint Monitoring Programme, atleast 11 per cent of the world’s population – 780 millionpeople – still lack access to improved drinking water and 37per cent – 2.5 billion people – lack access to proper sanitationfacilities. Lack of WASH access constitutes a ‘silent emergency’in which people are denied access to one of the most importantdeterminants of public health. The human toll of this globalchallenge includes illness, reduced income for families and eventhe death of an estimated three children every minute.Diarrhoeal diseases kill more than 2 million people every yearand 5,000 children under the age of five a day. The World HealthOrganization (WHO) estimates that other water-borne diseasesinfect about 10 per cent of the population of the developing world,causing malnutrition, anemia and stunted growth. Over and abovethe severe loss of life, water- and sanitation-related diseases severelyconstrain productivity and take a significant economic toll onaffected populations. WHO estimates that improvedwater and sanitation services would yield avoidedhealth-related costs of US$7.3 billion per year, andUS$750 million from gained adult working days.Although the world met the Millennium DevelopmentGoal (MDG) target of halfing the proportion of peoplewithout sustainable access to safe drinking water earlyin 2012, water and sanitation access is not advancingquickly enough to meet the needs of billions of people.Though many issues contribute to this challenge, amajor bottleneck is simply lack of household financialliquidity. Globally, people are spending up to 20per cent of their income on water because long-term,sustainable solutions (such as household water connectionsor rainwater harvesting tanks) are not affordabledue to the up-front cost. However, the poor who areclassified as living in the ‘base of the pyramid’ (BOP)are able to pay for these WASH products and servicesImage: Water.orgUnsanitary latrines hang over a flooded area in Dhaka[ 163 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONSuccess story: BanuFor more than 20 years, Banu hasbeen living in her Bangladeshi slum ofBegunbari with her two daughters. Herhusband died 15 years ago. She nowworks as a housemaid.Because she did not have a water systemnear her home, Banu collected water fromher best option – a dirty pond 20 minutesaway. She had to make this 40 minuteround trip two or three times a day to collectwater for all of her family’s bathing, cleaningand other household needs.Today, things are different for Banuand her daughters. After receiving aWaterCredit loan from Water.org and DSK,a new deep tube well was completed inher community.“After the installation of the deeptube well, we are able to get safe watermuch more quickly,” said Banu. “Now Ihave enough water for all my householdpurposes. Before this well, my daughtersand I would suffer from diarrhoea,jaundice, dysentery and skin diseasesbecause of the dirty water from the pond.By the blessing of God, we don’t havethese water-borne diseases anymore.”Golbanu Begum cleans vessels at her home’s new water connection in Pallabi, BangladeshImage: Water.orgif they are given the opportunity to do so over time. This mightnaturally lead to a thriving market in which those living in the BOPare empowered to seek WASH improvements – however, access tofinancing for water or sanitation improvements (WASH finance)is rare. While the microfinance sector has made access to financemore accessible for self-improvement and agricultural loans, thismarket has yet to fully reach the water and sanitation sector. Withmore than two decades of field experience, research and analysis,Water.org has determined that supporting the expansion of WASHfinance for the world’s poor should be prioritized as a major solutionfor increasing water cooperation and ending the global waterand sanitation crisis.WaterCredit is a model premised on the idea that many people inthe developing world can finance their access to safe water and sanitationif they can pay for these services over time and have a voicein their development and operation. In addition, by bringing financialtools to the WASH sector, WaterCredit can generate economicopportunities for utilities, governments, suppliers and consumers.The initiative builds on existing systems of microfinance, the bankabilityof the poor and the innate desire to improve one’s life andhealth. Through WaterCredit, Water.org provides financial andtechnical assistance to carefully selected local financial institutions,including microfinance institutions, to build their capacity to offerWASH finance to customers at the BOP. These financial products aredesigned based on the analysis of local market demand, and allowcapital to be redeployed to finance multiple WASH investments overtime. Philanthropic resources are used to provide the up-front technicalassistance that financial institutions need to develop these newand innovative loan portfolios. By leveraging philanthropic capitalto reduce risk and initiate loan products rather than using it as loancapital, philanthropy becomes catalytic and powerful. These fundscan be leveraged for commercial capital to create a demand-drivenand market-based approach which is desperately needed to see theend of the global water crisis. As a result, low incomehouseholds gain access to a microcredit loan to pay forwater connections and toilets within their homes, andimprove the well-being of their families and children.One size does not fit allWASH finance is not for everyone. The poorest populationsin most countries, often defined as peopleearning less than US$1.25 per day, will continue torequire direct development assistance, such as subsidiesto pay connection fees from governments andother development agencies. Meanwhile, those on thehigher rung of the economic ladder already have accessto traditional streams of financing. A middle portionof the BOP, however, which we broadly assume toearn between US$1.25 and US$5.00 per day, can payfor WASH improvements themselves with the help ofinnovative financing that leverages local cash flows andapplies microfinance-styled approaches. In 2008, MeeraMehta projected a demand of up to US$ 12 billion forthese loans over a decade (2008-2018). If this promisingdemand for water and sanitation improvementscontinues to go unmet, it will result in market failureand subsidized aid will not be able to keep pace. Byencouraging promoters and financiers to focus onthis opportunity as a lever, the financial industry canempower the poor to participate in the global solutionwithout relying on a failing system.Through the WaterCredit initiative and other WASHfinancing models, organizations can channel anddirect financial resources more efficiently, enablinga large segment of the population to meet their ownwater and sanitation needs through demand-driven,[ 164 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONImage: Water.orgImage: Water.orgBorrowers are given loan cards to track their loan balance and repaymentsRose Nungari uses her rehabilitated well and storage tank, obtainedwith a WaterCredit loan, for household use and to irrigate a gardenmarket-based services. This model can bring together various (andoften unconventional) actors to affect sustainable change.Case study: BangladeshBangladesh has one of the highest population densities in the world,with a population of approximately 160 million people and a land masssmaller than the nation of Greece. According to the Joint MonitoringProgramme in 2010, more than 28 million people in Bangladesh lackaccess to an improved water source and 66 million lack access to propersanitation. This problem is especially acute in the capital city Dhaka,which is widely described as a sprawling megacity by aid institutions.With a population of more than 12 million and an annual populationgrowth rate of more than 5 per cent, Dhaka has experienced enormousdifficulties in meeting water and sanitation needs. Approximately 85per cent of urban slum residents in Dhaka do not have access to safewater, and an estimated 40 per cent do not have a toilet.Due to rapid urbanization in Dhaka and other major cities, theGovernment of Bangladesh has emphasized access to safe drinkingwater and sanitation facilities in urban areas. Nearly a third ofDhaka’s population lives in urban slums and lacks legal access tosafe water connections. According to local laws, community residentsneed city approval before they can connect to city water pipes,and this is only given to residents who can provide proof of landownership. While government agencies wanted to increase access inslums, legal restrictions left the Dhaka Water Supply and SewerageAuthority (DWASA) without the ability to carry out its mandate.One of Water.org’s partners in Bangladesh – Dushtha ShasthyaKendra (DSK) a local non-governmental organization (NGO) in Dhaka– stepped in to help fill this critical gap. DSK’s founder, Dr DibalokSingha, saw that slum residents were forced to pay high prices for unsafewater supplied by slumlords, or they bought expensive bottled waterfrom the ‘water mafia’ in Dhaka, often at 15 times the rate that DWASAcharged legal water customers. Dr Singha met with DWASA’s leadershipto figure out how they could cooperate and reach those withoutsafe water access. DSK had a simple solution to a complex problem:empower the poor to become water and sanitationcustomers, and rely on their desire to improve their lives.Dr Singha convinced DWASA that slum residents wouldrepay water and sanitation loans if given the opportunity.In the end, he successfully lobbied the city to provide awater licence to his NGO on behalf of participating slumcommunities. Philanthropic grant funding enabled staff tobuild water and sanitation infrastructure, such as householdwater connections and toilets.In 2004, after witnessing the powerful relationshipbetween DSK and DWASA, Water.org realized therewas an opportunity for its new WaterCredit initiative.After reaching an agreement, Water.org provideda philanthropic grant or initial ‘smart subsidies’ toDSK, designed to attract and leverage additional social,commercial and civic capital and to cover fixed costsfor starting up the new loan development process andenhancements to its loan tracking system. This enabledDSK to pilot and roll out water and sanitation loansin target slum communities. The staff also learned thatadditional capital could grow and further scale the loanprogrammes, thus creating a natural ‘multiplier effect’.By taking this crucial first step and believing in theintrinsic power of the poor, Water.org, Dr Singha andDSK were able to reach more underserved communitieswith critical services, and increase the focus on the leveland nature of demand.In this particular WaterCredit programme, DSKprovides loans for both community and householdlevelwater and sanitation improvements. To initiatethe process, DSK’s staff works with the slum communityto help form gender-balanced water and sanitationcommittees. Each committee then pays to install waterpumps or toilets, and the costs of operation and maintenance.The committees also collect and pay the water[ 165 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONWaterCredit investment since 2004, including smart subsidies,commercial capital, and value of loans disbursedUS$ (million)30252015105Value of loans disbursedSmart subsidies to MFIsCommercial capital leveragedTotal capital invested in WaterCredit2004 2006 2008 2010 2012YearSuccess story: BanesaBefore experiencing the joy of a toilet, 48-year-old BanesaBegum and her family of five had no choice but to defecate inthe open or share an unhygienic hanging latrine with neighbours.Hanging latrines are shoddy structures often made out ofbamboo that sit a few feet above the ground. The humanwaste is not contained or treated and often enters into thewater sources, causing disease.Banesa and her family never had privacy. They enduredhorrible smells and suffered with dysentery, diarrhoea andworms. While Banesa’s family desired a toilet, it was not apossibility because they were trapped in the cycle of poverty,barely making ends meet.Water.org and DSK visited the Fulbaria slum in Dhaka,Bangladesh, where Banesa lives. They met with thecommunity and held awareness programmes about thedangers of hanging latrines and open defecation. And best ofall, they offered an affordable solution through WaterCredit.Banesa and other community members decided to take out aWaterCredit loan and install a hygienic toilet. They borrowed BDT60,000 (US$799) and built a community latrine. Today, all of thefamily members have privacy. There is no longer a pungent smelland the children are able to use a toilet safely. All are happy tofinally have a toilet, and no longer struggle with disease. Healthhas come to Banesa, her family and her community.Source: Water.orgbills, which helps increase the repayment rate. DSK staff providescritical hygiene education activities, including street plays andschool events, which raise awareness of contributing factors towater- and sanitation-related diseases. As well as providing criticalhealth messages, the education activities and training raise awarenessabout WaterCredit loan products and generate demand for theloans. DSK found that general ‘community assembly’ programmesprovided a unique way to bring residents together – for example towatch documentary films on sanitation or organize street plays onhygiene – creating general ‘camp-like’ atmospheres for residents tolearn about WASH awareness. Once demand is high, loan officerstypically meet with interested borrowers to fill out an applicationand create a repayment plan. The borrower’s family can then benefitfrom a household or community-level water connection and/ortoilet, depending on their needs.Through its WaterCredit programme with DSK, Water.org contributedfinancial resources and provided monitoring information systemstraining to staff. DWASA provided capacity building and training onwater and sanitation services, which enabled DSK to send communitydevelopment officers out to work with targeted slums. Water.org andDSK realized the programme created a winning situation for all parties:the government utility wanted paying water customers and to fulfil itsmandate, while slum residents wanted to have local, legal access toavailable services.Water.org and DSK continue to carry out this programme to extendthe reach of local utilities’ established water networks in these slumcommunities, and demonstrate that those living at the BOP representa reliable customer base. As a result, more than 60,000 slum residentsno longer have to pay an exorbitant price for safe water from illegalvendors and instead have financed their own household or community-levelsolution. This work would not be possible without theconstant cooperation between a government utility, an eager, sociallydriven NGO and smart philanthropy from donors such as Johnson& Johnson. Through DWASA’s engagement in the process, Water.org and DSK can continue to provide WaterCredit loans that enabledisadvantaged families in these slums to connect to pipedwater and shallow boreholes for safe, reliable drinkingwater. Moreover, the WaterCredit programme catalysesa necessary market adjustment that has the potential totransform millions of lives as households gain access tothe capital they need to benefit from improved water andsanitation services.A unique opportunityWaterCredit is one example of a microfinance-styleapproach to the water and sanitation crisis, whichprovides a unique opportunity to address communityresidents’ immediate demands and drive large-scalesystem change within the sector. By bringing inother thought leaders and socially-driven businesses,innovative financing models can address the flawedsystem that has limited large-scale and lasting solutionsto the water and sanitation crisis. The nextstage of growth will focus on improving investorconfidence in providing finance mechanisms for thepoor – a vast customer base that is overlooked bythe finance industry.The success of WaterCredit in places like Bangladeshdemonstrates that poverty is not absolute and that a significantsegment of the poor are willing and able to pay forservices when affordable financing is available. As microfinancesolutions for this crisis are scaled and expandedin new regions, the level of philanthropic investmentrequired to incubate this programme will decline, allowingsubsidies to be strategically channelled to the ultra-poorfor whom credit-based solutions may not be viable. Ifother organizations join in this solution, we can empowermillions of individuals in underserved communitiesto participate in their economy as water and sanitationcustomers, and take ownership of their future.[ 166 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONGovernance for cooperation andsuccessful watershed conservation strategies:the Water Funds caseVidal Garza, Carlos Hurtado, Priscilla Treviño and Ilsa Ruiz, FEMSA FoundationWatershed conservation is a priority that has beenexacerbated by climate change. The delicate balanceof nature, which offers vital ecosystem services tosociety, has been compromised in several parts of the world.The problem is a substantial one. An estimated 50 per centof the world’s wetlands have been lost since 1900 1 . Findinga solution to this is not straightforward though; usually anyconservation initiative requires cooperation and coordinationbetween multiple stakeholders for it to be successfuland sustainable. In Latin America, several approaches havebeen taken to tackle watershed conservation, including WaterFunds – innovative governance and financial structures thatenable downstream beneficiaries to invest in upstream conservation,which is needed to help secure water availability andother environmental services.FEMSA Foundation, together with The Nature Conservancy (TNC),the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), and the GlobalEnvironment Fund, developed the Latin American Water FundsPartnership in 2011. Their main goal is to create at least 32 successfulWater Funds in Latin America by 2016. These Water Fundscould support the conservation of over seven million acres of watershedsthat supply water to cities with a population of approximately50 million people. In order to achieve this, the partnership promotesthe collaboration between the private, public and socialsectors of society, and is committed to improving relationsbetween local Water Funds.The establishment of a regional governance structureis a key objective for the partnership. It believes thatthis will help to boost effective cooperation betweendifferent stakeholders. This cooperation, togetherwith the Partnerships regional influence, can improvethe effectiveness of local Water Funds and the waterconservation as a whole by promoting:• Efficiency through scientific tools, which promotethe allocation and execution of resources to maximizereturn on investment.• Financing through seed capital, which can bematched by public resources, invested on the financialmarket or used to develop local Water Funds;fundraising capabilities with local and internationalinterested investors; and development of innovativefinancial mechanisms.• Collaborative learning, which encourages WaterFunds to share best practices, develop regionalscientific studies, and gain knowledge from internationally-renownedexperts to provide guidance onongoing developments.What is a Water Fund?As defined in the report Water Funds: Conservinggreen infrastructure, published by The NatureConservancy in collaboration with other organizationsincluding FEMSA Foundation, “Water Funds are aninnovative way of paying and compensating for theservices that nature provides to humans. They attractcapital contributions from large water users such aswater supply companies, hydropower plants, irrigationdistricts and agricultural associations, among others,in an organized and transparent manner, adequatelyinvesting these resources to maximize their return oninvestment. The funds are invested in the financialmarket through trust funds, and the financial returnsare invested to leverage public and private fundsto conserve the watershed, to create or strengthenpublic protected areas, to pay for conservationeasements, to obtain financial and technical supportto promote more eco-friendly agriculture and livestocksystems that improve productivity, and to developcommunity initiatives.”Image: ©Shirley Sáenz / The Nature Conservancy[ 167 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONMonterrey, Nuevo León, MexicoMonterrey, capital city of Nuevo León, Mexico, has experienced numerous casesof flooding and drought throughout its historyThe Latin American Water Funds Partnership has already begundeveloping a governance structure to promote regional cooperationand align efforts and resources for the effective, large-scale andefficient conservation of watershed in the region. Although someWater Funds and related initiatives are already up and running, thepartnership expects this governance structure to further improveexisting activities and strengthen the impact of new Water Fundsin the future.The partnership recognises that, as with any initiative whereseveral stakeholders are involved to achieve a common goal, it isvery important to determine the Water Fund’s structure, definethe responsibilities of each stakeholder and manage individualexpectations. Ensuring everybody is involved in decision-makingis key – whether they are providing seed capital or other assets/resources to the Fund. Including public authorities is very important,as watershed is a public resource – but this can be complex,especially when they are subject to political influences and electoralcycles, which can jeopardise long-term efforts. Given the numberof parties that can be involved, as well as their different motives forcontributing to a local Water Fund, it’s important that participationincentives are also governed. Ultimately, the structure, or institutionalarrangement, of a Water Fund should be tailored accordingto local requirements.Metropolitan Water Fund of MonterreyLocated in northeast México, Monterrey is an industrial city characterizedby a thriving private sector, involved public authorities andsocial organizations that are passionate about natural conservation.The Metropolitan Water Fund (FAMM using its Spanish acronym) has19 stakeholders, representing private companies, public institutions,non-profit organizations and academia. All of them have interests inand influence on the local San Juan watershed, which provides 80 percent of all water required by the city. They participatein either a promoting or technical group, based on theirexpertise, interests and contribution to the Water Fund.The promoting group works closely with all the partiesinvolved in the watershed, including public and privatestakeholders, to provide expertise, knowledge andresources to the Water Fund. The technical group aretasked with creating sound action plans for conservationpurposes, ensuring that investment decisions align withthe conservation and management plans, programmesand conservation projects in the watershed.Taking into account all the different interests andopinions of the involved parties can be a challenge,especially when it comes to defining common goals.Scientific factors can be useful in this respect, as theydefine the most important needs of the watershed andhighlight key environmental issues – such as watersupply and the impact of natural disasters. With this inmind, FAMM’s stakeholders have agreed on the followingenvironmental-related goals:• Flood control: the target is to lower peak flowin the upper watershed by as much as 750 cubicmetres per second during extreme events. This willprevent natural disasters in the city basin, whichhave increased in Monterrey in recent years as aresult of climate change• Water infiltration: the target is to increase the wateravailable for infiltration by reducing surface run-offby at least 20 per cent.Other goals to restore and conserve the watershed are set bythe stakeholder group, based on their expert assessments.Promoting social awareness is also a key objectivefor FAMM. Making citizens more aware of their impacton the watershed can help to encourage responsiblebehaviour and drive further sustainability initiativesled by local communities. In addition, FAMM is keento highlight that parties that get involved with localrestoration and preservation field projects can receivefinancial support from public authorities.Science determines more than the strategic direction ofFAMM’s resources and efforts; it directly influences theintervention plan of the Water Fund. Critical areas thatrequire intervention are identified and prioritized based onscientific models to ensure the greatest returns on investmentin terms of the environmental services provided.Field actions are also defined based on these strategies.In addition, science factors provide a compellingargument for the execution of public resources inaccordance with FAMM’s strategic plan, as they dictatewhat conservation efforts will be most effective. Ingeneral, demand for resources far exceeds what’s actuallyavailable. Usually, FAMM can only offer aroundten per cent of the required resource per year to workwith, meaning that all activities and initiatives needto be carefully prioritised. It’s worth noting that theWater Fund itself should also be looking to gain additionalresources from other parties, such as governmentbodies and other local stakeholders.[ 168 ]
FINANCING COOPERATIONImage: © Cuencas y CiudadesInitiatives supported by FAMM include ditch construction in the Canoas communityScience is therefore one of the most relevant governance instrumentsfor the Water Fund. It helps coordinate private and public resources,define common interests, and promote strategic cooperation.Some of the challenges that FAMM faces are directly associatedwith the complex relationships between the different parties andgroups involved in the Water Fund, as well as their individualmotives. In 2010, for example, Monterrey was hit by hurricaneAlex. This caused widespread flooding, which devastated the cityand resulted in millions of dollars’ worth of damage. Stakeholdersgot together in different groups and tried to tackle the immediateproblem in different ways, with varying degrees of success. Threeyears later, the city is experiencing one of the worst droughts in itshistory. Again, stakeholders are having to act quickly to find the bestsolution to help affected communities.FAMM helps various stakeholders come together to draw up a longtermvision, which also takes into account management of short-termissues such as catastrophic flooding or drought. The science-basedactions ensure that the best interests of the watershed are alwaysFAMM’s first priority. The Water Fund serves as a common groundfor different sectors to come together, negotiate and define key objectives,and then work together in a transparent manner.By involving external consulting agencies, such asBaker&McKenzie and KPMG, the Water Fund aimsto demonstrate that it is managed through secureand transparent financial mechanisms that can besustained in the long term. The involvement of theseworld-class firms helps to build trust among contributorsto the Fund and improve cooperation betweenthem. To demonstrate that it is operating in the mosteffective manner and that the objectives of the keystakeholders are being met, FAMM also carries outannual audits of its internal processes. Transparencyand accountability mechanisms such as the onesmentioned before help strengthen the main goal ofFAMM’s governance structure: sustainable cooperationin the long-term.FEMSA Foundation is currently working togetherwith TNC and IDB to develop organization and operationmanuals to define the operation of FAMM andto ensure that the Water Fund continues to protectnatural resources in a sustainable manner for thebenefit of us all.[ 169 ]
VLegal Framework at theNational/InternationalLevel
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELIntegrated water resource management– combining perspectives fromlaw, policy and scienceAndrew Allan, Susan Baggett, Michael Bonell, Geoffrey Gooch, Sarah Hendry, Alistair Rieu-Clarkeand Chris Spray, Dundee Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science, University of Dundee, ScotlandWater resource management is a complex issue facedwith significant challenges, both in the UnitedKingdom and abroad. In order to succeed in dealingwith these challenges policymakers, water managers and waterprofessionals need access to concise information and researchresults that can help them make efficient and equitable decisionsover water. The Dundee Centre for Water Law, Policy andScience is the UK’s only Category 2 United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Centre. Its farreachingresearch activities encompass the links between watergovernance, science and policy. The centre’s work is carriedout with partners worldwide including in Africa, Asia, LatinAmerica and Europe as well as in Scotland and the UK.Key challengesWater professionals, policymakers and managers face significantchallenges including adaption to existing legal and policy systems,the special problems involved in water management in developingcountries, transboundary water management, interconnectionsbetween land and water, sustainability, climate change, and stakeholderand public participation.One of the main challenges facing water management is the integrationof different sectors and different levels of management andadministration in the context of both developed and developingcountries. This integration is often termed integrated water resourcemanagement (IWRM). Water resource management in a Europeancontext has been considered within a framework of extensive legislationin the field of environment and water since 1972. As well asgeneral issues around creating a level playing field for trade andbusiness, since the 1970s the European Union (EU) has increasinglybeen concerned with environmental protection to restore environmentsdamaged by industrial pollution, improve public healthand quality of life, ensure that the polluter pays, and contribute tosustainable development. The challenges include water polluted byindustry and agriculture, both current and historic; increasing waterscarcity, especially in the southern states; and increasingly unpredictablewater events such as floods and droughts.In order to address these problems, the EU has taken a number ofdifferent approaches – sometimes characterized as the ‘three waves’of EU water law – over the past 40 years. In the third wave, the EUhas been introducing a system of IWRM under its Water FrameworkDirective (WFD). The WFD requires states to organize their watermanagement on hydrological boundaries (river basins)even where these cross national boundaries, and to seekcooperation with third-party states. It requires monitoringand assessment of the uses to which water is put,and an explicit recognition of the trade-offs that aremade. It also requires integrated management of inlandsurface waters, groundwater and coastal waters; abstractioncontrols; full cost recovery for all water uses, notjust urban supply; and mandatory public consultationon draft river basin plans. Most of these features arecommon to all IWRM systems.As well as bringing in IWRM, the WFD also hasan overall objective of ‘good ecological status’. WhileIWRM is being introduced in many states followingagreement at the Johannesburg Summit on SustainableDevelopment in 2002, a goal of improved ecologicalwater quality is an ambitious concept which notall states would currently wish to attempt. Thus theEU is still at the forefront of developing environmentand water law concepts worldwide. Its work is beingfurther developed through the ‘water blueprint’ whichwill allow the continued refinement of IWRM in Europewith greater focus on water scarcity, flood and drought,and water efficiency.Developing countries, on the other hand, face rathermore difficulty than developed nations in implementingIWRM at the national level. IWRM is an expensiveapproach to put into practice in any event, and demandsthat a certain level of administrative and infrastructuralcapacity is in place for its operation. Despite thedifferences in national physical, social and economicenvironments, many developing countries face commonproblems in applying an IWRM approach to improvethe management of their water resources. These areaffected by the three key (financial, infrastructural andhuman) elements of water resource management, wherelack of capacity in any or all three may impede successfulimplementation of IWRM.The world water crisis has often been described asone of poor governance. While inadequate governancearrangements pervade all levels of water resources, oneof the greatest challenges – and a potential catalyst for[ 172 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELImage: G. GoochA woman boat rower on the Day River, Viet Nam. Water management should address the activities and involvement of local communitieschange at the national level – is to strengthen the governance ofwaters crossing sovereign borders. The task is formidable. Of the263 transboundary river basins and 200 or more transboundaryaquifers, only around 40 per cent have water sharing agreementsin place. These shared resources directly provide water for almosthalf of the world’s population within 145 countries, and indirectlybenefit others through the goods and services produced therein.Effective transboundary water governance arrangements providean important basis by which to maintain peace and security,foster sustainable development and respond to the likely impactsof climate change. However, major challenges remain because, asUN-Water observes, “existing agreements are sometimes not sufficientlyeffective to promote integrated water resources managementdue to problems at the national and local levels.”In the case of transboundary water, while there are still many challengesahead, it is important to recognize that significant progress hasalso been made. At the global level, the Convention on the Law of theNon-navigational Uses of International Watercourses was adopted bythe United Nations General Assembly in 1997, and will soon enter intoforce. This global framework instrument sets out the main substantiveand procedural legal norms for ensuring that transboundarywaters are shared in an equitable and reasonable manner. A furtherframework instrument of note is the 1992 United Nations EconomicCommission for Europe Convention on the Protection and Use ofRiver Dwellings on the Red River, Viet Nam. Strengthening thegovernance of transboundary waters is a major challengeImage: G. Gooch[ 173 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELImage: G. GoochA girl fetching water in the Vendha, South Africa. Shared resources provide water for almost half the global populationTransboundary Watercourses and International Lakes which, after20 years of successful implementation at a regional level, will soon beopen for all United Nations member states to join. Both these frameworkinstruments, as well as the United Nations General Assembly’sResolution on the Law of Transboundary Aquifers, provide an importantbasis by which to enhance the legitimacy of international waterlaw and strengthen the political will to enter into agreements at thebasin level. Ultimately, the effectiveness of any transboundary watergovernance arrangement will depend on there being a shared understandingabout who gets what water, when and why.Hydrological impacts of land use, especially degraded lands, andthe implications therein regarding appropriate land-water managementpolicies is also an important issue. For example, the water useof fast-growing tree plantations tends to be much higher than that ofthe degraded vegetation they typically replace – particularly wheretree roots have access to groundwater. Aside from these hydrologicalconsiderations – and in contrast to, for example, forest plantationmonocultures in developed countries – forest land in developingcountries also has to provide a variety of goods andservices (such as timber and fuel wood plus non-timberproducts including water, fodder and litter for animalbedding) to local communities in support of theirsubsistence farming systems. Consequently, access toland of this kind by these local communities is mandatoryand such incursions have potential hydrologicalimpacts which are presently less well known. This is anadditional dimension to an already complex process ofcommunity management embedded within integratedcatchment management. It will pose a considerable challengeto both local communities and the government infine-tuning water management policy.Increasingly, non-governmental participatorycatchment organizations are being seen as key to theeffective delivery of both national water legislation andthe desires of local communities for a better qualityof life. This is true in the UK where, as with other[ 174 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELEU member states, devolved governments take forward river basinmanagement planning under the WFD. But it is equally true indeveloping countries, where a focus on IWRM and the role ofstakeholder engagement in water governance has taken centrestage. The challenge is to retain the middle ground as ‘gatekeepers’of participative management, and to build and retain the trustof both state and society.By their very nature, water management issues and the role ofstakeholders encompass many policy sectors. Their effectivenessis based on trust, and on the delivery of solutions for protectingthe environment, the local economy and local communities. Thisrequires careful consideration of a number of key issues in relationto policy development, including the governance frameworkused; level of involvement and provision of support for stakeholders;providing accessible and appropriate access to information andcommunication platforms for stakeholders; alignment of policydevelopment; and implementation across all the different sectorswithin a catchment. In poorer regions, however, end users mayfind considerable difficulty in getting complaints heard. In formerlycentralized economies, experience suggests that water users may notwish to make decisions regarding management that they believe thegovernment should make for them. Where information is not readilyavailable, enforcement of individual use rights will be compromised.Regarding water use rights IWRM demands that upstreammanagement of a water body is compatible with downstream uses.Those making decisions about the allocation of water use rightsshould have a good understanding of the uses that are actually beingmade of a water body (for example volumes abstracted and for whatpurpose, seasonal variations and pollutants discharged) and whatits capacity might be at any particular point. While there may be adifference between actual use and authorized rights, determiningthe latter may be very difficult. This is especially true where userights are not registered or where there is no effective centralizedcadastre, at basin scale for instance, of permitted use rights. Settingup and maintaining the kind of comprehensive intersectoral permitsystem that would normally be needed – and that takes account ofthe interactions between related surface and ground waters – is veryexpensive and bureaucratically onerous.Given the basin-wide scope of IWRM there are also institutionalaspects to consider. Balancing equity, economics and the environmentthrough the issuing, variation and termination of water andland use rights should ideally take place at the watershed level. Thisis difficult for all countries irrespective of their economic status.Balancing national and more local policy priorities is often problematicwhere enforcement is through local agencies. This can beexacerbated by the barriers between sectoral authorities especiallywhere there are interdepartmental power disparities, for examplebetween agriculture, energy, water and environment.There are also additional challenges for the very poorest countrieswhen it comes to having the necessary data and technology. Thesecountries may not only lack the comprehensive long-term data setsthat are needed for decision-making, but also may not have theirown data-generating institutions such as a meteorology bureau. Thismay put them in the position where they must rely on neighbouringor upstream states for data, which in itself may entail significantcosts. Where the institutions do exist, the research and technologythat IWRM needs for the overall management of water resourcesmay not. For example, access to academic literature or up-to-datemodelling tools may not be available.Addressing the issuesThe Dundee Centre for Water Law Policy and Sciencehas been involved in many projects involving memberstates of the EU and partners from non-EU states.These projects have examined interdisciplinary problemsagainst the backdrop of water law, policy andscience in the context of both developed and developingcountries. A number of key observations and recommendationscan be made based on these experiences.It is desirable to be pragmatic, to move progressivelyand not to attempt to do everything at once. So a usefulstarting point will always be a core set of parameters forwater quality which are relevant to that country contextand can be monitored and enforced. If desired, these canbe supplemented by a wider set of guideline parameters.In addition, it is reasonable for states to have standardsfor drinking water quality and waste water treatment,and to recognize the linkages between water and otheraspects of environmental law.Almost all countries are moving towards IWRM. Here,the essential preliminary stage requires mapping andmonitoring of the resource and an assessment of currentwater uses and status before there can be meaningfulfuture planning. The WFD sets out a clear frameworkfor these activities, while its integrative approach andguidance on participative methodologies can also behelpful to other countries even if the level of detail inthe WFD is not appropriate. IWRM has developed as adominant paradigm, especially for developing countries.The key concepts of integration between sectors andadministrative levels, as well as stakeholder and publicparticipation, should be introduced when possible.The EU’s attempts to achieve ‘good ecological quality’may also be of interest to other countries, recognizingthe iterative nature of the relationship between emergingscientific knowledge, the subsequent developmentof policy objectives and the establishment of thesepolicies into law.Much can be gained by sharing knowledge andunderstanding of water governance and managementexperiences between stakeholders from a range of backgrounds.This requires the development of research andeducational programmes that deepen our knowledge andunderstanding of the social and physical factors that influencethe effectiveness of water governance arrangements.Particularly in the case of developing countries, attentionneeds to be given to how policies address the ongoingactivities and involvement of community-based managementin relation to land and water resources. Appropriateplatforms are vital for stakeholders to gain access to informationand be able to influence decision-making.Regarding the effectiveness of any transboundarywater governance arrangement, ultimately this will becontingent on there being a shared understanding overwho gets what water, when and why. There is a requirementnot only for further capacity for research, but alsofor the ability to share the experiences gained betweentransboundary basins, and the ability to enhance thecapacity of stakeholders across borders.[ 175 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELCommunity benefits achieved throughdeveloping legal frameworks at domesticand transboundary levelsStefano Burchi, Chairman, Executive Council, International Association for Water LawWater resources are found above and below the landsurface. Thus, water is almost instinctively associatedwith land ownership. Groundwater in particularhas long been associated with private property, with landownersclaiming the freedom to pump as much water as they pleaseunder the legal ‘rule of capture’, regardless of the effects onresource stocks and on their neighbours.Although the rule of capture can be said to invite indiscriminatewater pumping, it is possible to limit its destructive potential. Forexample, although the rule of capture prevails in the state of Texas,United States, state water legislation also provides for the creationof groundwater conservation districts with a mandate to protectgroundwater from indiscriminate pumping. This legislation enablesdistricts to set spacing requirements for wells, production limitationsand production fees. Many districts above the giant Ogallala aquiferhave adopted spacing requirements, while Houston and San Antoniohave set limits on the amount of groundwater that can be extractedfrom each well. The Harris-Galveston Coastal Subsidence Districthas opted for a fee schedule aimed at discouraging groundwaterpumping. And in Northern Texas, the High Plains UndergroundWater Conservation District has implemented a successful overdraftmanagement approach based on education and the promotion ofconservation technologies. 1 In each case, water laws enabling andempowering groundwater conservation districts are enabling localcommunities to benefit from sustainable groundwater withdrawalsfrom relevant aquifers.India has also experienced serious groundwater over-extractionproblems, precipitated and made increasingly worse by the samelegal rule of capture that prevails in Texas. In response to the threatposed by indiscriminate groundwater pumping, the state of Punjabpassed legislation in 2009 restricting the timing of paddy nurserysowing and paddy transplanting by farmers. All farmers, whetherthey are owners, tenants or share croppers engaging in agriculture,horticulture, agroforestry or similar economic activities, face severefines if they breach the restrictions. This simple and straightforwardmeasure has had an impact, with farmers responding well to thenew regulations.A different basic water law prevails in Spain, where groundwateris public property. Nonetheless, it is reckoned that there is alot of illegal water pumping in the country. Like Texas, Spain hasresponded to the problem with legislation that provides for theformation of groundwater user associations which are empowered tomonitor and police pumping restrictions. For example, in 1997 thegroundwater users’ association of the Mancha Orientalaquifer and the local basin authority agreed not to allowany new water users until all existing users held propergroundwater extraction rights. Since then, the associationhas been proactive in monitoring and reporting allillegal groundwater use. 2 The success of the ManchaOriental groundwater users’ association in ensuringsustainable water withdrawals from the aquifer can beattributed to the legislation that enables this type ofassociation to exist and to function, and provides themwith the power needed to accomplish their goals.Many laws on water resources provide mechanismsand opportunities for the public and for local communi-Water legislation can help to limit the destructive potential ofindiscriminate groundwater pumpingImage: Int. Assoc. for Water Law[ 176 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELImage: Int. Assoc. for Water LawDomestic and transboundary water laws are enabling local communities to benefit from sustainable groundwater withdrawalsties to participate in water resource management. Thanks to theselaws, people can bring an action in the domestic law courts for anybreach of legislative rights. Public interest litigation is one of the legalmechanisms that allow individuals and groups to ‘vindicate the publicinterest’ and seek redress for injury suffered at the hands of publicauthorities or companies. Examples of this kind of litigation can befound in Africa, Asia and Latin America, where poorer sections of thecommunity are enabled to access the courts. In India, for example,the Supreme Court has heard complaints about water pollution,encroachment of the riverbed, mining and water management. Onesuch case resulted in the Coca Cola company being forced to relocateits business from the state of Kerala, after a long legal battle disputingthe company’s groundwater pumping stations at its bottling site. 3The Genevese aquifer, straddling the border between France andSwitzerland, is a good example of successful cross-border cooperationin managing the water resources of transboundary rivers, lakes oraquifers. Two formal agreements were negotiated in 1978 and 2008respectively, enabling intense cross-border cooperation between localcommunities sitting above the aquifer. As a result, the communitiesconcerned have paid for a successful artificial recharge programme forthe aquifer and implemented an effective programme of groundwaterwithdrawal controls with intense monitoring on both sides of theborder. This has enabled a stable supply of drinking-quality water toGeneva and the surrounding communities. The success of this crossbordercooperation is acknowledged to have been facilitated by thelatitude of formal legal engagement by the local communities acrossthe border, enabled by the international legal arrangements in place. 4Another useful example of lasting cross-border cooperation in aradically different sociopolitical, cultural and economic environ-ment is that between India and Pakistan over the waterresources of the Indus River basin. Prompted by anelaborate water-division treaty concluded in 1960, cooperationhas since survived the frequent political tensionsbetween the two countries. It has yielded irrigation andpower benefits to vast segments of the populations inhabitingthe river basin on both sides of the border. Theresilience of the 1960 treaty has been attributed to itsbeing extremely well crafted, and to its recognizing thecountries’ limitations and ring-fencing each country’saccess to the basin’s water resources. 5Mali, Mauritania and Senegal provide a furtherexample of successful cross-border collaboration.The countries cooperated in developing the water andpower potential of the Senegal River in West Africa,and in the management of water and power resourcesharnessed by the construction of the Manantali andDiama dams in the 1980s. This has delivered enormousbenefits in terms of dependable river water flowsfor irrigation, power generation, enhanced river navigabilityand flood control for the three cooperatingcountries, and especially for the river basin populationsliving across the borders. All of these benefitshave been made possible by an interlocking andpioneering web of inter-state agreements among thethree Senegal river basin countries spanning some30 years, from the signing of the Convention on theStatute of the Senegal River in 1972 to the adoption ofthe Senegal Waters Charter in 2002. 6[ 177 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELNew approaches to planning anddecision-making for fresh water: cooperativewater management in New ZealandClive Howard-Williams, Chief Scientist, National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research, Christchurch;Alastair Bisley, Chairman, Land and Water Forum, Ministry for the Environment, and Ken Taylor,Director Investigations and Monitoring, Canterbury Regional Council, New ZealandDespite its clean and green image, New Zealand has experiencedmany of the same disputes over water quantityand degrading water quality that are found in othernations. Adversarial processes and litigation have dominatedwater allocation and permit applications, leading to stalemateand inaction. In 2008 stakeholders agreed at the national levelto embark on a collaborative process to improve freshwatermanagement and governance. Successful experimentation withcollaborative processes has also proceeded at the regional level,especially in the Canterbury region.New Zealand’s water resourcesNew Zealand’s natural landscape, including mountains and naturalforest, occupies 43 per cent of its surface and contains near-pristinerivers, lakes and wetlands. The remaining land area comprisesplanted forest (5 per cent) farmland (52 per cent) and urban development,mostly in lowlands that are now almost devoid of naturalvegetation. 1 New Zealand’s economy depends significantly on pastoral,arable and horticultural farming. Given the intensification ofland use over the last 20 years, it is not surprising that the countryexperiences problems with both the quality and quantity of water. 2Abundant fresh water is seen as one of New Zealand’s greatesteconomic resources. 3 By international standards, New Zealand hasa high level of clean fresh water per person with a total renewablewater resource of 84,000 m 3 per person per year. Current annualwater consumption is less than 5 per cent of the New Zealand supply(runoff to the sea) and yet:• there are sometimes shortages in some places• the areas where water resources are fully allocated are increasing• occasional droughts occur across large areas of the country withsignificant impacts on the national economy• water quality degradation is putting increasing pressure on thefreshwater environment.Problems with water managementAs in most countries there are multiple interests in water. Theseinclude cultural, spiritual and identity; recreational, social andpersonal; environmental; and economic interests. Sometimes theycomplement each other and at others they compete.New Zealand’s Resource Management Act of 1991 introducedan effects-based approach in which permits for water uses (takesand discharges) are based on the effects of the use.Although permits are time-limited, existing permitholders “enjoy significant protection of their priorityover newer entrants.” 4 Once effects indicate thatthe resource is fully allocated, no new entrants to theresource are permitted. But regulatory barriers to thetransfer of permits make it difficult for water to move tothe most productive users. Furthermore, effects-basedconsenting often allows the provision of permits toalready compromised water bodies on the basis that thenew consent will have only minor effects – resulting incontinuing and worsening cumulative effects.The debate about economic uses of water has beendifficult to resolve and processes for allocating waterhave been the subject of litigation in many catchments.Several principal issues needed to be resolved:• competing interests where the parties seldomengaged except in court• the effective exclusion of Mori from governanceand management in many catchments• inconsistent policy and planning• poor use of science and knowledge• lack of acknowledgement of the need to set andmanage within limits – the only policy mechanismwe know of to deal with cumulative effects.Responses at the national levelIn response to the difficulties of managing water in a litigiousenvironment, a group of around 50 key stakeholdersfrom all sides of the debate established the Land and WaterForum (LWF) in 2008. Their approach was sparked bya report on Scandinavian collaborative approaches to theresolution of complex and contested environmental issues,which suggested that they could be fruitfully applied inNew Zealand. 5 There was also a sense that unless all theparties were prepared to engage with each other directlyover the whole range of freshwater issues, conflict andstalemate would persist with damaging consequences forthe environment and economy.The LWF consisted of a plenary group of over 50 organizationsand agencies with a stake in water management[ 178 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELImage: NIWADouble Hill Stream in the Canterbury high country has high water quality, reflecting the undeveloped nature of the catchmentand a ‘Small Group’ of 21 major stakeholders assisted by regional andcentral government as ‘active observers’. This subgroup carried outthe principal task of formulating consensus. It included pastoral agricultureand horticulture, forestry, hydropower, water infrastructureinterests, recreationalists, tourism and environmental groups, as wellas Mori tribes representing the Crown’s Treaty of Waitangi partners.The forum received extensive help from the knowledge communityin New Zealand including scientists, social scientists, economists andpolicy specialists, mostly without payment.The Government gave LWF two successive mandates and substantiallyfunded its operations. Over a four year period, LWF reachedconsensus on a fully-developed blueprint for land and water managementin New Zealand. The forum prepared three reports, and after thefirst one forum members travelled to all 16 regions of New Zealand todiscuss the suggested recipe for reform with the wider public.In its three reports and their 158 recommendations (and a statementon Mori rights and interests) the LWF recognized that water mustbe managed in the context of the whole hydrological cycle and thatthe way we manage land and soil affects the quantity and availabilityof fresh water. In essence, it recommended bottom-line objectives,set at the national level, to ensure that all water bodies are of goodecological health, that their prestige, or 'mana' – as Mori paticipantsput it – is maintained and are not harmful to human health.It proposed that within this framework, quantitative and qualitativeobjectives for water bodies should be set by communities at catchmentor subcatchment levels, and it described the collaborative processesby which these tasks should be carried out. It made detailed recom-mendations on how the freshwater objectives and limitsshould be met. These included approaches to improvemanagement practices for land and water use and to dealwith over-allocation, the clarification and extension ofthe consenting system, and the facilitation of voluntarytransfer and trading of consents.Following the forum’s first report and its conversationsaround the country, the Government put in place a limitsettingregime for fresh water through its 2011 NationalPolicy Statement on Freshwater Management, whichrequired regional authorities to set limits for water qualityand quantity. It also put in place a National Clean-upFund and an Irrigation Acceleration Fund. These actionsopened the way for the forum’s second mandate and itsmore detailed second 6 and third 7 reports.In March 2013 the Government issued theFreshwater reform – 2013 and beyond consultationdocument calling for:• a catchment-based collaborative planning process• a National Objectives Framework requiring allwaters to meet minimum states for ecosystem andhuman health and to provide for consistency ofapproaches among regional authorities• government direction, guidance and supportfor regional authorities to ensure infrastructure,processes, techniques and tools are in place tomanage water within the limits regime.[ 179 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELSeveral regional councils are already engaged in implementing theNational Policy Statement on Freshwater Management and theGovernment is finalizing the details of its further freshwater reformpackage stemming from proposals based on, and consistent with,LWF’s recommendations.Responses at the regional levelThe Canterbury region on the east side of New Zealand’s SouthIsland has relatively low rainfall, but with major agriculturalinvestments and significant growth opportunities if more wateris available and water quality can be maintained. While LWF wasdeliberating at a national level, the Canterbury Regional Counciland its associated district councils had already embarked on acollaborative form of regional water governance and management.This is now at a stage where it will greatly facilitate theLWF recommendations, the requirements of the National PolicyStatement on Freshwater Management and any new governmentwater reforms.Water disputes in Canterbury have been particularly acrimoniousin the past, resulting in a series of major court cases largely dueto the “breakdown of trust and confidence between environmental/conservationand farming/irrigation interests in the context ofunprecedented pressure on the water resource and the lack of aclear strategic approach to water management.” 8 To address this,the Canterbury Regional Council (in concert with local districtcouncils) called for a better way forward based on “collaborationand integrated management to maximize the opportunitiesfor the environment, economy and community of Canterbury inthe years ahead.” This was the genesis of the Canterbury WaterManagement Strategy (CWMS), 9 addressing challenges such asthe pressure on river systems (especially lowlandstreams) and aquifer systems, cumulative effects onecosystems, cultural health of waterways, water useefficiency, climate change, water quality impairmentand infrastructure issues.The new strategyA paradigm shift was needed in the way water is allocatedand managed with the following changes:• a shift from effects-based management of individualconsents to integrated management based onlarge community and catchment-oriented watermanagement zones• management of the cumulative effects of waterabstraction and land use intensification• water allocation decisions that address sustainableenvironmental limits and climate variability• actions to protect and restore freshwaterbiodiversity, amenity values and natural character.The CWMS is underpinned by a set of guiding principles(which have legal status under the legislationthat mandates governance of the Canterbury RegionalCouncil) and 10 targets. 10 Principles and targets encompasscultural, economic and social aspirations as well asenvironmental ones, but the requirement to manage thewater resource sustainably is a ‘first order’ principle.Key to the implementation of the CWMS was theestablishment of 10 cooperatively managed watermanagement zones. Zones involve one or more majorImage: Canterbury Regional CouncilThe Canterbury Plains and Lake Ellesmere /Te Waihora. The lake’s water quality depends on cooperative management under the CWMS[ 180 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELcatchment and are based loosely on hydrological and administrativeboundaries. Each zone is large enough to enable the management ofabstraction from surface and groundwater systems to be integratedwith the management of the irrigated areas where the water is used,but small enough to ensure that committee deliberations take fullaccount of local catchment issues.Cooperation is encouraged through public participation in thedecision-making process of Zone Water Management Committees,which coordinate the development of a Zone ImplementationProgramme. Zone committees comprise 7-10 members who arelocally based or have a special relationship with the zone. Membersare drawn from the regional council, local authorities with an interestin the zone, Mori communities, and community members suchas consent-holder representatives and water resource stakeholders.Community members are selected based on their demonstratedability to collaborate and the need to ensure a balance of interestsand geographic spread. A Regional Water Management Committeehandles issues that are common across the region. This committeebrings together representatives of local government, central government,the Mori authority and water stakeholders.Next stepsZone Implementation Programmes have been developed for each ofthe 10 zones, and zone committees have an ongoing role in overseeingthe implementation of their programmes. Integration across thezones is provided by a regional Land and Water Plan that deals withcommon issues and sets the regional context.Zone Implementation Programmes address:• environmental restoration and development• land use intensification/reduction• zone scale infrastructure and its environmental impact• reconfiguration of allocations between surface and groundwater• water brokerage and efficiency improvement• water quality and quantity• customary use• recreational and amenity provision.In effect, the Zone Implementation Programmes are social contractsin which all parties agree on a way forward to enable community andeconomic wellbeing while safeguarding the ecosystems on which theydepend. The key objective is to provide long-term planning stability,including recommendations to the regional council as to the regulatoryframework they would like to see governing water resourcemanagement in their zone. These sets of rules constitute sub-regionalplans, which are essentially zone-specific extensions of the RegionalLand and Water Plan.Current statusOne sub-regional plan has been completed, and three otherzones are deliberating on their approach to setting quantityand quality limits. Council planners work closely with the zonecommittees to ensure that their recommendations can be translatedinto workable policies and rules. Most importantly, theregional council decision makers have undertaken to representas faithfully as possible the wishes of the zone committees inthe plan development process. Before plans become operationalthey are subject to a public hearing conducted by an independentpanel appointed by the council. Thus the final form of theplan is, in theory, beyond the direct influence of either committeeor council. In practice, it reflects the cooperativecommunity engagement process by which it wasdeveloped, representing the outcome of collaborativethinking across a wide range of community valuesand interests and a consensus approach to solvingcomplex problems.Making collaboration workCollaborative water management in New Zealand hastaken off in the last five years at national and regionallevels. We expect these early successes to ensureongoing momentum.Collaborative management requires that parties thatdo not agree on a complex problem are given a mandateto talk to each other systematically and intensively overa considerable time, aiming to reach consensus on howthe problem should be resolved. To commit themselvesto this task, participants must feel that their responsibilityis real, inescapable and unconstrained, and thatdecision-makers want them to agree and will haveserious regard for the conclusions they reach.In the experience of LWF, issues that will benefitfrom a collaborative process are likely to be complex,requiring enduring solutions and involving multiplestakeholders. They may require adaptive managementsolutions, where outcomes are expected to evolve overtime in response to changing knowledge of a resource.LWF’s second report made detailed recommendationsfor collaborative processes for freshwater management.In summary, collaborative processes should:• allow all interested groups to send their ownrepresentatives and include Mori representation• operate with a consensus rule• have a skilled independent facilitator/chairperson• allow options to be articulated where consensuscannot be reached• be supported by information on economic, social,cultural and environmental aspects of resources andtheir management, and by scientific informationabout them• have a mandate from a public decision-makingbody to address issues, and report to that body• have a realistic timetable for completing the work• have resources for doing the work, for examplewith funding from the decision-making body andparticipants• occur early in government or local governmentplanning processes or, in particular applicationsfrom developers, at a stage when a range of optionsis still open• engage decision-makers as servants of the process.In New Zealand, collaborative processes at bothnational and regional levels have refocused the freshwaterdebate. Our focus is no longer on disputing whetheror not there is a problem, but on the best options – cooperativelyarrived at – for solving the problem. Throughcollaboration, we see a challenging but rosier future forthe state and the use of New Zealand’s fresh waters.[ 181 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELThe US-Mexico institutional arrangementfor transboundary water governancePolioptro F. Martinez-Austria and Luis Ernesto Derbez, University of Las Americas Puebla, Mexico;and Maria Elena Giner, Border Environment Cooperation Commission, Mexico-United StatesThe border between the United States (US) and Mexico,as defined by both countries, spans a region of 100 kmon both sides of the border and runs 3,141 km in lengthfrom the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico. It comprises fourstates in the US and six in Mexico. The two countries exchangegoods worth more than a US$1 billion every day. 1 The US isthe largest trading partner for Mexico, and Mexico is the thirdlargestfor the US. Twenty-two US states have Mexico as theirfirst or second export destination.The population living along the US-Mexico border is about 13million people, and is expected to double between 2025 and 2030.Ninety per cent of the population reside in 15 ‘twin cities’, largeurban centres that are separated only by the border and aware thatthey share a common destiny. The border region, in its entirety, islocated in one of the more arid areas in the world, with rainfall onGrowth of coverage indicators for water and sanitation servicesin the Mexican border with the United States100806040200Source: BECCDrinking water Urban drainage Water treatment1995 2006 2010 2012the west coast close to 270 mm per year on average,and on the east coast around to 575 mm. The region issubject to severe and frequent droughts. 2The border between the US and Mexico shares theextensive watersheds of two of the largest rivers inNorth America: the Colorado River and the Rio Grande(Rio Bravo in Mexico). The social development andwelfare of the inhabitants of the vast border regionof both countries depends substantially on the waterresources of these rivers.Since the nineteenth century, relations between theUS and Mexico have been marked by challenges, andsometimes disputes about their shared water resources.Throughout 125 years the two countries, despite theireconomic and cultural differences, have managed tobuild a legal and institutional framework which hasprovided governance to the management of theseshared waters, and has allowed this natural resource tobe a source of cooperation instead of conflict.Within the extensive international legal frameworkbetween the two countries are, of particular importance,the Treaty of 1944 Water Distribution, theTreaty of La Paz for the Border Environment and theparallel agreement signed in the context of the FreeTrade Agreement that created two new binationalorganizations responsible, among other things, forsupporting the conservation of the environment alongthe border.The institutional arrangement between these twocountries for the management and improvement oftransboundary waters is coordinated by the US StateDepartment and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs ofMexico, with the US Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) and the Ministry of Environment and NaturalResources of Mexico also playing an important role.Three binational organizations play a key role related totransboundary waters: the International Boundary andWater Commission (IBWC), the Border EnvironmentCooperation Commission (BECC) and the NorthAmerican Development Bank (NADBANK). All theseinstitutions have the status of international organizations,and enjoy a high degree of operational independence.For 123 years, IBWC has been and continues tobe responsible for the management of internationalwaters between the two countries, defined in the 1944[ 182 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELImage: BECCSocial validation is an essential component of the support and international funding model for the border regiontion to this climate crisis. As the drought duration andintensity increased, communities in Texas put enormouspressure on state and federal governments in theUS. The same thing happened within Mexico betweendownstream and upstream states. In accordance withits functions, IBWC provided a valuable negotiatingframework in which both governments, taking intoconsideration the demands of the states and communities,converged and produced a set of minutes to dealwith the crisis. BECC, through its public participationmechanisms, led a process involving irrigation usersin both countries in supporting a special programmefor the efficient use of water, created specifically todeal with drought. In particular, investments in irrigationsystems in Mexico improved efficiency in wateruse which led to adjustments in water rights. Therecovered water was delivered to tributary rivers, andeventually reached the international reservoirs wherewater is shared by US and Mexico. Reducing the waterrights of irrigation users was not an easy task, but theactions of both governments in the context of BECCmade it possible. NADBANK, meanwhile, at the directionof the US and Mexican governments, establisheda special programme for financing these investmentsfor efficient use of water at irrigation systems along theborder. In this manner, in complex rounds of negotiationsbetween the two governments that lasted nearlytwo years, the binational institutions were allowed toparticipate in the process associated with water consertreatyas waters that arrive at the international sections of the RioGrande and Colorado River. Under the 1944 Treaty, both countriesmake commitments to share water from both river basins. Mexicoagrees to grant to the US an annual volume of 432.72 million cubicmetres on average in a five-year cycle from the Rio Grande basin,and the US is committed to deliver to Mexico 1.85 billion cubicmetres per year from the Colorado River. 3 The treaty also providesfor dispute settlement mechanisms, particularly empowering thecommission to issue minutes, which in turn form part of the treatywithout modifying its terms, so as to manage water under specificconditions such as drought or floods. So far there have been 184minutes, more than one per year on average, which have coveredtopics as diverse as construction and operation of dams on internationalriver sections, construction and joint operation of sanitationinfrastructure at the border, and the consequences of extremehydrometeorological events.BECC and NADBANK, meanwhile, were created jointly in 1993by a special agreement signed in the context of the negotiations ofthe Free Trade Agreement between the two countries. They are sisterinstitutions whose mission is to improve the environment and livingconditions of the inhabitants of the Mexico-US border. Althoughthey are independent institutions, they share objectives and have asingle governing board. At the head of both organizations there is anational of each country, on a rotating basis.This institutional arrangement was severely tested during thedrought of 2000-2006, which caused Mexico to accumulate a deficitof deliveries to the US from the Rio Grande near the volume of a fullfive-year cycle. The binational institutions, under the supervisionof both governments, acted together to achieve a cooperative solu-[ 183 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELImage: BECCA successful public participation process in Mexico helps projects to meet the specific needs of communitiesvation infrastructure until satisfactory agreements for both countrieswere reached. Confrontation was avoided and the problem movedfrom the conflict zone into the area of cooperation. Currently, thisinstitutional arrangement is being tested again by the most severedrought in the past 70 years. Now, the drought affects the entireborder region, endangering the almost unique sources of water forthe inhabitants of the border region.One of the greatest achievements of this cooperation schemehas been the border programme of water and sanitation infrastructure,led by the EPA and its counterpart in Mexico, the NationalWater Commission. The purpose of the programme is to improvethe coverage and quality of water services, and therefore health, inthe border area. To this end, the EPA established the Border WaterInfrastructure Program, 4 which in turn funds the EnvironmentalInfrastructure Fund (BEIF) and the Project Development AssistanceProgram that are managed by NADBANK and BECC respectively tosupport studies, designs and construction. In a few years, this borderinfrastructure programme has obtained remarkable results in indicatorssuch as coverage of water and sanitation services. Through thisprogramme, the US invested in water and sanitation infrastructureat the border, not only within its country but also within Mexicanterritory. Mexico, for the projects selected for the BEIF programme,must match the funds invested by the US using federal, state ormunicipal funding. To access these investments, communities inthe border region of both countries must be approved through aproject certification process that is completed through BECC, aunique mechanism to obtain the BIEF funds. Once approved, fundsare deposited with NADBANK as well as the Mexican matchingcounterpart. This certification means that the approved projects aresustainable, technically and financially feasible, withoperation and maintenance plans, and are understoodand supported by the communities.This bilateral cooperation scheme is unique in theworld, establishing an organization which directly identifiesthe needs of the communities, supports their proposalsto meet certification criteria – a body of technical andfinancial requirements – with a long-term planningperspective and with social validation. At the same time,both governments devote resources to this border region,supporting and funding these projects, mainly channelledby NADBANK. This process also includes the coordinationand participation of various levels of the federal, stateand municipal governments of both countries along withmembers of the public and private sectors.In Mexico, a distinctive component of this scheme hasbeen a successful public participation process independentlyconducted by BECC. The process serves not onlythe technical components of projects, but also meetsthe specific needs of the communities and addressestheir points of view and concerns. This approach hasmade a huge difference in this type of infrastructureprojects in Mexico. Virtually no case of strong oppositionduring construction of certified projects has beenregistered, because projects were agreed to in advanceby the communities. Instead, the process has madepossible the obtaining of public support on controversialissues such as the increase of service fees, which hashappened in many border cities to ensure sustainable[ 184 ]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AT THE NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL LEVELImage: BECCPublic participation has made it possible to obtain support on controversial issuesoperation of water utilities. For the first time in transboundary watermanagement, there is a model of support and international fundingfor a specific border region, which includes a component of socialvalidation that is essential in the process of certification.Since its inception, BECC has certified 130 water and wastewaterprojects in the border region benefiting 12.8 million people. Totalinvestments on the Mexican border reached US$591.9 million, ofwhich US$287.7 million have come from EPA’s resources throughBEIF. As a result, indicators of service coverage have had very significantincreases. In Mexico, these indicators between 1995 (the startof BECC and NADBANK operations) and 2012 have increased from89 per cent to 98 per cent in drinking water, 64 per cent to 93 percent in urban drainage, and 20.8 per cent to 87 per cent in wastewatertreatment (BECC statistics). These figures are well above theaverage in Mexico.Economic and population growth in this region – the highestin the two countries and one of the largest in the world – alongwith the expected climate change effects that, under most probablescenarios, predict reductions in rainfall and therefore less wateravailability, pose a future of greater scarcity which will test thisinstitutional arrangement. There is a clear need for major changes,institutional strengthening and greater binational dialogue.In short, the institutional arrangement reached between the US andMexico increases the binational water governance that has allowedthe solution of conflicts caused, for instance, by frequent droughts,and has improved the water services in the region. The institutionscreated include not only – as in other countries – a bilateralcommission for distribution of water or navigation regulation, butalso institutions responsible for environmental conservation and aspecific bank to finance infrastructure, with capital fromboth countries. This legal and institutional arrangementis unique in the world, and can be an excellent modelfor cooperation in other transboundary basins.Main Mexico-US treaties and agreements related totransboundary watersMexico-US Treaty of 1848 – Sets limits between bothcountries and establishes sections of the Rio Grande andColorado River as borderlines between the two countries.As a result, the basins of both rivers become internationaltransboundary basins.Convention of 1889 – Sets the boundary commission (IBC),the predecessor of IBWC, between the two countries.1944 Water Treaty – Distributes among the two countrieswaters of the Colorado and Rio Grande rivers, introducingcommitments from Mexico to the US in the Rio Grande and fromthe US to Mexico in the Colorado River. Extends the capabilitiesof IBC to IBWC. Creates a system of dispute settlement.La Paz Agreement, 1983 – Both countries agree to developjoint actions to improve the environment in the border region.Through this agreement the EPA and SEMARNAT developlong-range joint programmes such as the current Border2012 or the Border Infrastructure Program.1993 Agreement for the creation of BECC and NADBANK –Under the agreement, signed in the context of NAFTA, thesetwo binational organizations are created and their operatingcriteria established.[ 185 ]
VIWater Cooperation,Sustainability andPoverty Eradication
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONManaging water: from local wisdomto modern scienceIgnasius D. A. Sutapa, Executive Secretary, Asia Pacific Centre for EcohydrologyThe Asia Pacific Centre for Ecohydrology (APCE) is acategory II centre of the United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Itfocuses on ecological approaches to water resources management,to provide sustainable water for the people by harnessingscience and technology, education and culture. APCE is committedto contributing towards overcoming current and importantissues of national, regional and global interest, such as poverty,climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction.Several activities have been planned to help achieve this objective.These activities benefit from the results of past and current researchactivities conducted by the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI)and its partners.APCE has and develops expertise and experience in:• relationships between ecological pattern and hydrological process• disturbance and dynamics in natural and anthropogenic ecologyand hydrology• ecohydrological approaches to biodiversity conservation,environmental management and ecological restoration• integrating hydrology with ecological planning,design and architecture• transdisciplinary studies of regional sustainability fromthe perspectives of ecohydrology, ecology or both.Some recent activities are detailed below.Integrated Flood Analysis System courseThe Asia and Pacific region has various climate characteristicsthat put it at risk from hydrometeorologicalhazards which are often associated with extreme events.Some countries in the region are vulnerable to floods,and the annual flood losses are too high for any governmentto bear.A technical course was organized based on the frameworkof the Flood Forecasting and Warning Systemwhich was conducted in 10 countries (Australia,Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Lao People’s DemocraticRepublic, Malaysia, the Philippines, the Republic ofKorea, Thailand and Vietnam). This Integrated FloodImage: APCEOne of the constructed wetlands used to improve domestic wastewater treatment[ 188 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONAnalysis System (IFAS) course was realized in collaboration withthe International Centre for Water Hazard and Risk Management,the UNESCO Jakarta Office and LIPI. The objective is to enablegovernment agencies to use appropriate software (IFAS) for floodforecasting and warning systems that lead to increasing capacityin managing water resources under climatic variability and relatedextreme phenomena. The course entails the provision of nationaldigital geographic information system data for the creation of modelsat the target river basin as well as local hydrological/hydraulic datafor run-off analyses and model validation.Demo site for community-based water managementThe objective of the demo site for ecohydrology development is toact as a field station for the implementation of ecohydrology conceptsin the field. The demo site ecohydrology campaign is expected tobe significant in socializing the sustainable management of waterresources in accordance with the concept of ecohydrology. It will alsoserve as a natural laboratory for the future development of ecohydrology,especially as a tropical Indonesian concern. Ecohydrology demosite development in Indonesia will be directed to a location demo siterepresenting the concept of sustainable water resources managementin several different groups, namely an ecohydrology demo site for thecommunity-based management of water resources.Community is an important factor in supporting the sustainablemanagement of water resources. Community groups are expected tobe agents of change in an effort commonly referred to as integratedwater resources management. In 2012, the ecohydrology demo sitefor community-based development on water management was establishedat community-based public schools.Pesantren – traditional Islamic boarding schools – are verycommon in Indonesia. They provide a community that is in a strongposition in society, led by a Kiai (a respected Islamic leader). Membersof this community are generally role models in society, and can beexpected to transfer knowledge outside the communityrelatively easily through personal communication.• The pesantren generally covers primary to seniorhigh school levels of education, and the demo siteprovides one way to introduce education aboutwater resources in these schools.• There are about 26,000 pesantren in Indonesia.Although the exact number has not been recordedwith certainty, the overall estimated pesantrenin the country could empower up to 20 millionpeople. The success of socialization and thecampaign for sustainable management of waterresources in the school community demo sitelocation will be used as a model for other Islamiccommunities and, ultimately, the general public.Pesantren Ar-Risalah in the Kudat district was selectedas one of the locations for demo site development.This has been done in 2012 and activity will continuein 2013. The Pesantren Ar-Risalah project involvedapproximately 2,700 people consisting of boardingstudents, teachers and support personnel who aremostly local people.Water resources used to meet the daily needs ofthe boarders come from groundwater and river waterin Cijantung. Groundwater is used by means of artesianwells, while the river water goes through simpleprocessing tanks for coagulation, flocculation andfiltration. The quality of the river water used needsattention, to make sure it meets quality standards forthe allotment of domestic activities such as hygiene andsanitation. Sewage disposal systems in boarding schoolsare still open, or there is open dumping in the environ-Image: APCELocal people studying water management[ 189 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: APCEThe subak system: temple, paddy field and waterment. Solid waste and liquid waste is disposed of in open landfillsin the back yard of the boarding school, while domestic solid andliquid waste is discharged directly into water bodies through thepipes without prior processing. This, of course, would be bad bothfor local air and water quality and for public health, given the qualityof river water that is used directly. Assessments of the quality of theraw water used and of waste management for boarding occupantshave made these areas the focus of attention for improving waterresources management at the site through demo site ecohydrology.Artificial wetland for wastewater treatmentIn the early stages of development, demo site ecohydrology atPesantren Ar-Risalah Kudat focused on improving the quality ofdomestic water and waste management. Domestic wastewater treatmentis done by constructing artificial wetlands, hereafter referred toas ‘wetland’. This wetland functions to improve the quality of domesticwastewater originating from the bathroom, kitchen and any placeof ablution that is not directly discharged into the river water bodies.Meanwhile, domestic solid waste will be collected in a communalseptic tank where water run-off can flow into the wetland. In orderto improve the quality of water supply to schools, there are futureplans for the manufacture and installation of water treatment plantsat school locations, using river water as a raw material.Cultural landscape and the subak system in BaliSubak is the name of the water management (irrigation)system for paddy fields on Bali island, Indonesia,developed more than 1,000 year ago. Over that time,this traditional ecologically sustainable irrigationsystem has constantly adjusted to changing situations.The result is an intricate system which is stronglyinterlinked with Bali’s natural, social, cultural andreligious environment.The cultural landscape of Bali consists of five riceterraces and their water temples which cover 19,500ha. The temples are the focus of the cooperative subaksystem of water management for canals and weirs,which dates back to the ninth century. Included inthe landscape is the eighteenth-century Royal WaterTemple of Pura Taman Ayun, the largest and mostimpressive architectural edifice of its type on the island.The subak system of democratic and egalitarian farmingpractices has enabled the Balinese people to become themost prolific rice growers in the archipelago despite thechallenge of supporting a dense population.Rice, the water that sustains it and subak, the cooperativesocial system that controls the water, have[ 190 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONClean water produced by local people using IPAG60together shaped the landscape over the past thousand years andare an integral part of religious life. Rice is seen as the gift of God,and the subak system is part of temple culture. Water from springsand canals flows through the temples and out onto the rice paddyfields. Water temples are the focus of cooperative water resourcemanagement by a group of subaks. Since the eleventh century thewater temple networks have managed the ecology of rice terracesat the scale of whole watersheds. They provide a unique responseto the challenge of supporting a dense population on a ruggedvolcanic island.In total, Bali has about 1,200 water collectives, and between 50and 400 farmers manage the water supply from one source of water.The property consists of five sites that exemplify the interconnectednatural, religious and cultural components of the traditional subaksystem – where the subak system is still fully functioning, wherefarmers still grow traditional Balinese rice without the aid of fertilisersor pesticides, and where the landscapes overall are seen to havesacred connotations.The subak is a mixture of different units:• Technologically, it includes a dam and an intricate system ofcollectively owned irrigation canals• Physically, it comprises all rice terraces within clearlydefined subak boundaries. These boundaries are defined byall rice fields which receive irrigation water from the subakirrigation infrastructure• Socially, it consists of all farmers who cultivate land withinthe subak boundaries and receive water from the subakirrigation infrastructure• Religiously, it includes ceremonies on individual, subak andinter-subak levels. The ceremonies are linked to a hierarchicalorder of water temples which play an important role in thecoordination of irrigation water and pest management. 1Image: APCEIPAG60: alternative technology for clean water inpeatland areasIndonesia’s attention to the issue of environmentaldamage is increasingly intensifying. One causeof the worsening environmental conditions is themanagement of natural resources that either cannotbe renewed or that are renewable but have exceededtheir capacity. Environmental sustainability andecosystem levels have not been maintained and theparties involved – in this case, the private and stateenterprises, governments and communities – need todevelop good cooperation and synergy for sustainableenvironmental management.If the quality of the social life of the community inquestion is good enough, then its ability to supportenvironmental conservation programmes will bebetter. Regional development in buffer zones andtransition areas should be done to create economicactivities that benefit the community in the region inorder to preserve and protect the core area. Activitiesundertaken include the development and applicationof appropriate technologies that can meet the basicneeds of communities around the reserve, includingwater supply and other economic resources. Economicdevelopment implementation programmes in bufferzones and transition areas are expected to balance theinterests of conservation with the economic interestsof the development of biosphere reserves.The majority of areas in Riau Province and CentralKalimantan Province have land with peat surface water,which characteristically has:• low pH levels (2-4), making it highly acidic• high levels of organic matter• high levels of iron and manganese• yellow or dark brown colour.This kind of surface water is basically not suitableas raw water for drinking. Compared with freshwatersurface water, the water from the turf needs to beprocessed specifically through several additional stages.Improving the efficiency of water treatment plantsrequires a review of potential issues that may arise inevery phase of the water treatment process. Meanwhile,the first phase of the IPAG60 research activity aims toconduct field observations in order to determine thelocation of IPAG and to learn about the readiness andwillingness of local communities to adopt appropriatetechnologies that will be implemented.Peat water treatment technology that has been establishedin previous studies (2009-2011), by Ignasius D.A.Sutapa and team enables peat areas to have peat watertreatment facilities for the drinking water supply. Duringthe implementation and testing of the water treatmentfacility, this is limited to the area of Katingan, CentralKalimantan province. However, a lot of territory in someareas in Indonesia – especially Sumatra and Kalimantan– have clean water source issues. Implementation of thistechnology in the wider area is necessary to support theincrease in water services in the region.[ 191 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONWater for life: inspiring action and promotingbest practices in local cooperationJosefina Maestu and Pilar Gonzalez-Meyaui, United Nations Office to Support the International Decade for Action‘Water for Life’ 2005-2015/UN-Water Decade Programme on Advocacy and CommunicationTo achieve water security and sustainability, concertedefforts must be made to promote water cooperation notonly in transboundary river basins and at river basinscale, but also at local scale, including between irrigationdistricts and cities. Cooperation is necessary to deal with majorissues such as the upstream and downstream impacts of waterpollution and water abstraction.The United Nations Office to Support the International Decade forAction ‘Water for Life’ 2005-2015/UN-Water Decade Programme onAdvocacy and Communication has supported the International Yearof Water Cooperation through UN-Water’s Water for Life Award andthe International Annual UN-Water Zaragoza Conference. In 2013both these events aimed to promote best practices and the recognitionof outstanding projects and programmes in water cooperation.The award is open to projects or programmes achievingparticularly effective results in the field of water management orin raising awareness on water issues. The International AnnualStakeholder cooperation in ZaragozaStakeholder cooperation in Zaragoza has been built through seven initiatives:• saving 1 Hm 3 in domestic water consumption in one year in Zaragoza(mainly focused on habit changes)• training the city: 50 good practices (technological changes)• 160,000 public commitments to water saving• solving water conflicts through social mediation• a scream for water as a human right: the Pavilion for Citizen Initiatives, ElFaro• ZINNAE, urban cluster for water efficiency• a water alliance for Central America: Water Nexus.A number of lessons have been learned from these experiences. Forexample, it is necessary to invest time and resources in order to build trustamong the actors participating in these multi-sector projects. Identifying acollective and shared challenge and ensuring that objectives are simple,concrete and achievable is crucial to success. Objectives also need to beattractive to the general public.‘Triple therapy’ (new public regulation, civic awareness/active citizensand responsible market instruments) requires a cooperative environmentbetween three main actors: public administrations, NGOs and businessentities. It is important to create a motivational core of entities committedto the project, and the role of the facilitator is crucial in translating cultures,integrating different approaches, mediating between partners with conflictingviews and managing the egos of partners and other involved entities. It isalso important to identify an active minority that can become a network ofallies for change. In addition to all these elements, patience is essential tobuild up the revolution we need in water management. 3UN-Water Zaragoza Conference of 2013 identifiedthe tools and approaches to promote water cooperationby sharing lessons from recent experiences. Theconference introduced the key skills required forwater cooperation, with particular attention to theirimportance in the process of negotiation and mediationand examples of their application in national andinternational water settings.Local cooperationThe importance of local cooperation was highlighted at theAnnual Zaragoza Conference in 2013. It was recognizedthat at the local level, coping with the growing needs ofwater and sanitation services in cities is one of the mostpressing issues of this century. Sustainable, efficient andequitable urban water management has never been asimportant as it is today. Half of humanity now lives incities and in two decades three out of five inhabitants ofthe planet will be urban dwellers. This urban growth isfaster in the developing world and it creates unprecedentedchallenges. The relationship between water and cities iscrucial. Cities require a very large input of fresh water andin turn have a huge impact on freshwater systems.Cities have proved to be sources of innovation in watermanagement, creating new models for water and sanitationservice delivery and financing. High demand forbetter services and pressures on scarce resources can driveinnovation and improvements or lead to real hardshipsand environmental damage. The pressures are especiallyacute in the peri-urban periphery where governance deficitsare frequent. Stakeholder engagement and publicparticipation are key to the coordination of various actorsand interests in cities. 1 Many problems can only be solvedby ensuring collaboration among different stakeholders.Urban water management faces some terrible problems,but it is possible to facilitate improvements in horizontaland vertical cooperation at global, national, city andcommunity/local platform levels.Award-winning projects of the 2013 Water for LifeAward have also focused on water cooperation. Theyhave shown how reaching out to others beyond municipalboundaries and engaging stakeholders to overcomeobstacles can be powerful in solving problems andensuring a sustainable future.[ 192 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONBasin-wide groundwater management using the system ofnature in Kumamoto City, JapanThis has been the case in Kumamoto City in the centre of Kyushu,the southern major island of Japan. In cooperation with neighbouringmunicipalities, Kumamoto City government has managed anartificial groundwater recharge system using abandoned paddies andprotected watershed forests. Drinking water for the city’s 730,000citizens is totally supplied by this abundant groundwater, whichis chlorinated only at a minimum level without further purification.By protecting the natural systems and conserving Kumamoto’shigh-quality groundwater, the city can provide its citizens with highquality ‘mineral water from the tap’.The city has undertaken various efforts to maintain its abundant,pure and crystal-clean groundwater so it can pass down this treasureto future generations. Between 90,000 and 270,000 years ago, thevolcanic Mount Aso experienced four violent eruptions with pyroclasticflows. These flows deposited and accumulated to more than100 metres in thickness, and became an ideal groundwater aquiferfor the region. In addition, about 400 years ago, Kato Kiyomasa, thefeudal lord of Higo (now Kumamoto), promoted the developmentof paddy fields along the Shira river alluvial low land, where it iseasy to permeate and recharge the local groundwater aquifer. Thissituation worked well and allowed Kumamoto access to a far greateramount of clean groundwater. Kumamoto City does not have analternative source for groundwater, and can face a crisis when theresource dries up or is polluted. With rapid urbanization since theearly 1970s, the amount of percolated groundwater has decreasedwhile water use has increased.Kumamoto has carried out various initiatives to conserve itsgroundwater, including the adoption of the Declaration of theGroundwater Preservation City in 1976 and the installation ofgroundwater observation wells in 1986. As part of these efforts,the city has conducted research on groundwater flow systemsin the area and identified a trend towards long-term decreasesin groundwater levels. This was mainly due to the decrease inPaddy fields along the Shira river helped to recharge Kumamoto City’s localgroundwater aquiferImage: Kumamoto City, Japangroundwater recharge, which was mostly caused bychanges in land use in the recharge area over the past30 years. The decline in groundwater recharge levelsfrom paddy fields was due to the practice of convertingpaddy fields to dry fields, and this accelerated the fallin groundwater levels.As a result, the city saw that it needed to cooperatewith neighbouring municipalities in order to conservegroundwater. To tackle issues that cannot be solvedwithin one administrative district or one municipalityalone, cooperation with concerned adjacentmunicipalities is indispensable. The city formulatedan agreement to maintain and increase groundwaterrecharge through cross-municipal cooperation. Majorcooperative initiatives started in 2004, includinga project to flood the converted paddy fields of theShirakawa river mid-basin and to maintain the watershedprotection forests in the upper basin.Cooperation on the project to flood the paddyfields was carried out through the Council forSustainable Water Use in Agriculture, which consistsof Kumamoto City, Ozu and Kikuyo towns, fourlocal agricultural land improvement districts, JapanAgricultural Cooperatives (JA) Kikuchi and JAKumamoto City East Branch. The project providessubsidies to encourage farmers to flood theirconverted paddy fields with water from the Shirakawariver every day for one to three months between Mayand October. Farmers may flood their fields afterharvesting and before planting and growing crops.The amount of subsidies depends on the length ofthe flooding period. The flooding is effective notonly to recharge groundwater levels, but also to limitthe negative effects of weeds, insects, diseases andcontinuous cropping issues. Moreover, flooding helpsto reduce the use of agricultural chemicals, preventsgroundwater pollution and reduces financial costs.Important watershed forests, which are vital toKumamoto City, are located in the upper basins of thePromoting cooperation in Bogota, ColombiaThe Río Bogotá is highly polluted. The project focused onthis issue and specifically preventing pollution by smallscaleand informal sector tanneries on the upper part ofriver. Key players, including an association of tanners,the environmental regulator, local government, an NGO, auniversity and the Chamber of Commerce, were engagedthroughout the project.The Sustainable Water Management ImprovesTomorrow’s Cities’ Health project of the United Nationssupported a process of conflict resolution, capacity buildingand dialogue, and the regulator is now pursuing thesealternatives to a punitive, legalistic and failing approach.Almost half of the informal small enterprises that werepolluting have now implemented cleaner productionprinciples, thereby removing much of their pollution.This has also led to an increase in their productivity. Theresearch supported the tanners in making changes and afollow-up project is now expanding this approach across awider catchment area. 2[ 193 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: ©World BankThe relationship between water and cities is crucial, often leading to innovation in water managementShirakawa river and the Midorikawa river outside the city. Likerice fields, the maintenance of watershed forests requires cooperationamong neighbouring municipalities. Having seen the seriousdamage caused by the flood of the Shirakawa river in 1953, municipalitiesin the upper basin and those in the lower basin recognizethat maintaining forests is crucial for disaster and flood prevention,and proactively work together for mutual benefit.Groundwater conservation cannot be achieved only by increasingrecharge capacity. Kumamoto City is raising awareness amongits citizens to reduce water use in the city. With corporate efforts,the groundwater pumping regulations imposed on major groundwaterusers and the decline of agriculture, the overall groundwaterpumping has steadily decreased year by year since the 1980s.Kumamoto City has carried out various initiatives to emphasize theimportance of saving water. At the beginning of 2008, the city designatedthree months from July to September as the ‘Water Saving Months’,disclosing the amount of daily water use per person and promoting theuse of water-saving devices. On 1 April 2012, local residents, the privatesector and the city government went above and beyondtheir respective positions and came together to form anew organization devoted to sustainable groundwatermanagement. With the Kumamoto Groundwater Councilas its parent organization, the Kumamoto GroundwaterFoundation was incorporated and established. The foundationaims to harmonize the water usage practices of theentire community by improving the maintenance, qualityand circulation of the local water supply.The cost of dam construction and waterworks(excluding maintenance) for 100,000 tons of riverwater per day has been estimated at almost JPY65billion (approximately US$7.7 billion). If KumamotoCity had extracted water from rivers running throughthe city, it would need to spend a considerable amountmore to remove sulphur from Mount Aso. The city istaking advantage of the groundwater recharge systemto obtain good quality groundwater.[ 194 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONProtecting natural systems can help ensure a high-quality water supplyThe Safe Water and Sanitation for all in Moldova InitiativeThe Republic of Moldova, with a total population of 3.56 millionpeople, is one the poorest countries in Europe, with a gross domesticproduct (GDP) of US$7 billion. According to World Bank data in2005, only 4 per cent of the rural population had a sewerage connectionand only 55 per cent of the total population had access to basicsanitation (a pit latrine with a lid). However, even having accessto a house connection did not mean having access to safe water.Indeed, the Moldovan National Environmental Action Plan calculatedthe social and economic impact of water pollution and reachedthe conclusion that polluted drinking water (rural and urban) ledto between 950 and 1,850 premature deaths and 2-4 million sickdays annually. The cost to the economy was assessed to be 5-10 percent of GDP. According to Moldova’s Ministry of Health, poor waterquality is responsible for 25 per cent of acute diarrhoeal diseases,hepatitis A, and 15 per cent of non-infectious diseases registered inthe republic. The most widespread diseases caused by the consumptionof poor quality water are chronic nitrate intoxication, dentalfluorosis and gastrointestinal diseases.Rural citizens in the Republic of Moldova rely on small-scalewater supply systems or shallow wells which can be contaminatedwith microorganisms and nitrates. In rural Moldavian communities,severe nitrate contamination of wells is common and animal andhuman excreta are the main sources of contamination. Illegal wastedumping, of which 45-50 per cent is animal waste, often leads tosurface water pollution and unsightly areas.The Safe Water and Sanitation for all in Moldova initiativewas started by non-governmental organization (NGO) Ormax toImage: Ormax ACTimprove the situation in rural Moldova by mobilizingcitizens and authorities to realize and respect theright to access safe water and sanitation through thesustainable management of local resources. Such implementationsincluded maintaining clean water sourcesto improve human health, which helps to maintain theenvironmental integrity of aquatic ecosystems.The main strategy for achieving these objectiveswas to promote the participatory practice of includingthe local population in educational (workshops,training) and practical activities (testing and mappingthe wells, identifying sources of pollution, cleaning),and demonstrating solutions (such as Ecosan toilets)for effective and affordable water protection in ruralareas. In each community a village committee wasestablished which included the mayor, the schooldirector, one or two teachers, one or two parents, andchildren’s representatives involved in a water safetyplan (WSP). The village committee was responsiblefor project activities, implementation and communicationwith the village inhabitants and the localNGO partner.The water quality measures were shown on mapswhich were available in the village halls, and peoplecan now avoid the most polluted sources of water.The activities had a visible impact on the community’sbehaviour: no more solid waste is dumped near thepublic or private wells. Spring cleaning of wells is onceagain a tradition in the communities where awarenesswas raised during the project. The number of leafletsdistributed, wells tested, and meetings and workshopsheld, have all superseded the original planned numbersand now serve as parts of a toolbox for the people of theRepublic of Moldova.Public participation was a determinant factor in thesuccess of the project. Another factor was the authorities’support and participation. The initiative involvedlocal, regional and national authorities in all the activitiesand found that their support motivated publicparticipation. In this particular project, the importanceof involving authorities in the activities was crucial forachieving the project objectives and ensuring sustainability.Developing activities with national authoritiesat all levels was a way to guarantee that activities wereboth coherent with the local community’s needs andsustainable after the project was finished.Public institutions, the regional council and theteaching inspectorate supported project activities,and their regional representatives were present in thecommunities during the core activities. This strategywas sent to the ministries of environment andhealth and some of the proposals were integratedin the national strategy for water protection: theWSPs were recognized by the national authorities asan effective tool in water protection at communityscale and are recommended by national authoritiesto be implemented in rural communities in orderto protect water resources by identifying risks andreducing sources of pollution.195
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONInternational water cooperationKitty van der Heijden, Ambassador, Sustainable Development and Director,Department for Climate, Energy, Environment and Water, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The NetherlandsLook at poverty, one of the persistent disgraces of our time,and you will see water. Still today, 1.1 billion peoplelack access to clean, safe drinking water, using less than5 litres (1.5 gallons) per day, and over 2.5 billion people areliving without adequate sanitation. Lack of safe water andadequate sanitation is the world’s single largest cause of illness,and 5,000 children die every day from diseases from tainteddrinking water. 1 Sub-Saharan Africa has the largest number ofwater-stressed countries of any region. Growing out of povertyrequires increases in food, manufacturing and energy – all ofwhich in turn depend heavily on sound water management.But water scarcity isn’t just poverty related. In 2008, the tankerSichem Defender arrived at the port of Barcelona carrying somethingfar more precious than its usual cargo of chemicals. 2 The nearly 23million litres of drinking water – enough for 180,000 people for aday – was the first delivery in an unprecedented emergency plan tohelp Spain, suffering its worst drought since records began 60 yearsago. After months without adequate rainfall its reservoirs were downto just over a quarter of normal capacity. A year ago they stood atalmost double that.A sand dam in East Ethiopia which creates enough groundwater to supply thenomadic population and its cattle with safe water the whole year throughImage: Paul van KoppenThe above is a grim reminder of what a worldwithout water can look like – and how a lack ofwater destroys ecosystems, causes economic distressand aggravates poverty. The water that exists todayon Earth is roughly the same as the water present atthe time dinosaurs roamed the Earth, though its formand location have shifted constantly across the globalhydrologic cycle. Yet pressures on water resources aremounting. And as pressing as water issues are now,they will become even more important in the nearfuture. Experts predict that by 2025, less than 15 yearsfrom now, nearly two thirds of the world’s populationwill experience some form of water stress. Withthe existing climate change scenario, some estimatessuggest that by 2030 demand for water could be 40 percent greater than current sustainable supplies. Nearlyhalf the world’s population will live in severely waterstressed areas, to the point at which a lack of water willimpede and even reverse social and economic development.Fragile states in northern Africa and the MiddleEast are most likely to experience water shortages, butChina and India are also vulnerable. 3About 70 per cent of the water used in developingcountries goes to agriculture. Without proper soilmanagement, watershed management, and integratedmanagement of water supply and demand, sufficientclean water will not be available to meet the needsof people, agriculture and ecosystems. Water withdrawalby the energy sector is expected to rise by onefifth through 2035, while the amount consumed (notreturned directly to the environment) increases by amore dramatic 85 per cent. 4 Higher rates of urbanizationwill increase demand for drinking water andindustrial use with consequent higher waste disposaland treatment, also requiring greater energy use.Collection of used water, separation of pollutedwater from less polluted waters, and preventionand management of wastewater pollution includingtreatment of used water, are becoming increasinglyimportant to protect populations and ecosystems aswell as to facilitate economic development. In the faceof the growing demands on finite water resources, itwill become necessary to consider wastewater as anadditional resource.Adapting to climate change is largely about water.More frequent and heavier rainfall will flush morepollutants into water systems, for example due to over-[ 196 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONWe are, in summary, dealing with a hydro-climaticproblem with the potential to destroy ecosystems andparts of the economy, and exacerbate poverty as well asinequalities and tensions among and between nations.It is for good reason that elder statesmen of theInterAction Council recently called on the UnitedNations Security Council to recognize water as one of thetop security concerns facing the global community. “Thefuture political impact of water scarcity may be devastating,”former Canadian Prime Minister and InterActionCouncil co-chair Jean Chrétien stated. “Using water theway we have in the past simply will not sustain humanityin future”. 9 Even the business community understandsthe need for enhanced global water management. The2013 Global Risk Report the World Economic Forum(WEF) called water scarcity one of the biggest threatsto prosperity of mankind, ranking water crises as morelikely, and having greater impact globally, than chronicfiscal imbalances and food shortages. 10 WEF presentsa scary risk list: deficient adaptation to climate change,increasing greenhouse gas emissions, more extremeweather events, mismanagement of land and water andwater crisis. All of these have to do with our planetaryboundaries. WEF also raises the flag on possible pricespikes in energy and agricultural products. And asmentioned before, in these areas water is a crucial factor.Most water is shared across nations and people. Atotal of 145 nations include territory within internationalbasins, and 21 countries lie entirely within internationalbasins. 11 Of the world’s 263 international basins, 158 lackany cooperative management framework. 12 Over the last60 years, governments have signed more than 300 internationalwater agreements, while there have only been 37cases of reported conflict between states over water. 13Nevertheless, in a report for the US State Department,the US Director of National Intelligence noted that duringthe next decade water problems will contribute to instabilityin states important to US national security interests. 14Based on an analysis of past water disputes, which contributedto tensions between rivals including nuclear-armedIndia and Pakistan, Israel and the Palestinians, and Syriaand Iraq, 15 it concludes that after 2020, the risk of geopoliticalwater conflict will likely increase. 16Management of water is thus not only about technicalsolutions, but also about establishing a governancestructure that enables countries to develop and implementthem. How to distribute the available water inorder to meet demand is essentially a question of politiloadedwastewater systems. As the Earth warms, rainfall patternscan shift, bringing new patterns of drought and flooding; and risingsea levels, storm surges, flood damage, and saltwater intrusion willthreaten human lives and livelihoods, both directly and indirectly,through diminished freshwater supplies.Humanity has long managed human needs for water withinthe hydrological cycles; and we can continue to do so – evenwith increased demands and shifts in hydrologic patterns – if wemanage water more sustainably. Water cooperation will be an absolutenecessity in the coming decades in order to cope with multiplewater challenges worldwide.In the Netherlands, we pride ourselves of being probably the bestprotected delta against floods in the world. Four European rivers,including the Rhine and the Meuse, reach the sea over Dutch territory.This makes the whole country a ‘multiple delta’. Almost 60 percent of our territory is vulnerable to flooding from either the sea orthe rivers, and it is precisely in these areas that we earn two thirdsof our national income. The Dutch water management model – ablend of engineering ingenuity and a governance model that is theresult of 700 years of gradual adaptation – owes its existence todisasters, floods and broken levees. Yet what is often forgotten is thatthe Netherlands is vulnerable not only to flooding, but also to waterdepletion, shortages of groundwater, subsidence, salt intrusion andtransboundary pollution.The Netherlands have had to take into account all aspects ofwater in a densely populated area, vulnerable to weather, wind,sea and other elements – and still organize it to raise welfarelevels. We were, in other words, forced to take a holistic viewof water management, to integrate sustainability upfront in ouraction agenda, and to include stakeholders both within and outsideour borders. And this is exactly what is needed in future watercooperation frameworks: an integrated vision on sustainable watermanagement across borders.Achieving global water security for all is an enormous challenge.We are approaching an increasing number of natural andplanetary boundaries and have already crossed several suchboundaries. What this means in practice is reflected in the dailynews. The signs are unmistakable, and the challenges are mounting.The world will have 9 billion people in 2050. More people,larger economies, bigger cities, and more factories mean we willneed to waste much less, and produce more food – in 20 years,about twice as much food – to meet growing demand. Yet watertables are already more depleted than we had thought. In northernIndia, for example, over-extraction of groundwater couldimpact food security and access to water for millions of people.So we will need to produce more food, using less water. Waterscarcity already affects more than 40 per cent of the world’spopulation across every continent, and the situation will becomemore severe in the coming decades. 5As a result of population growth, economic development andchanging consumption patterns, the competition for water will grow– between agriculture, mining, industry and cities; within societiesand between countries. Especially the poor suffer from waterstress, as they are the ones who are directly dependent on water as anatural resource for their living. Women are particularly dependenton sufficient and safe water for household water supply, sanitation,hygiene, food production and processing.The economic and social costs of inaction are daunting. As extremeweather events increase, they bring unprecedented damages:• in early 2012 once-in-a-century floods submergedswathes of Great Britain and Ireland, causing someUS$1.52 billion in damages 6• in 2003-2009 the Middle East lost a volume ofwater equivalent to the needs of up to 100 millionpeople in the region 7• millions of people could become destitute in Africaand Asia as staple foods more than double in priceby 2050 as a result of extreme temperatures, floodsand droughts. 8[ 197 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Antonie de KempImage: Rita TesselaarA local community in Eastern Province, Zambia benefitting from water cooperationprojects supported by the NetherlandsWater governance is essential when countering increasing pressure onwater resources. Children play alongside a polluted river in Egyptcal economy. In principle, water is a renewable resource, but thereare physical and ecological boundaries that limit its use. How wemake those choices depends on the institutional ‘setting’ for decision-making.For example:• Who has power, and who has control over transboundarywater resources?• Who is involved in decisions?• Are these decisions transparent?• Is there adequate information?• Is there sufficient accountability?Examples from different parts of the world illustrate that sustainablewater use has everything to do with the politics around distribution,within and between countries. It is essential to involve all sectorsof society with a stake in shared water resources, and to developinstitutional capacity and a culture of cooperation well in advanceof costly, time-consuming crises which could threaten lives, regionalstability and ecosystem health. It can be done.Take the Netherlands. Water has long constituted an integral part ofour spatial planning. Having the right amount of water for water usersat the right time, in the right place, and at socially acceptable costs isone of the key targets. But being a delta country, transboundary cooperationwas crucial too. In the twentieth century water quality becamea serious issue. Due to industrialization across Europe, the Netherlandsbecame the soakage pit of Europe. During the period 1973-75, at thepoint where the Rhine flows into the Netherlands, the river carried anaverage of 47 tons of mercury, 400 tons of arsenic, 130 tons of cadmium,1,600 tons of lead, 1,500 tons of copper, 1,200 tons of zinc, 2,600 tonsof chromium, and 12 million tons of chlorides every year. 17 Clearly,something had to be done. Decades of international cooperation andthe development of international rules with riparian countries upstreamfor the protection of these shared resources followed. 18 Although ittook many years, the Rhine, Meuse and Schelde river basin countriesconcluded treaties about the integrated management of these rivers.We invested heavily in knowledge, learning by doing, and innovation.The public and private sectors have joined forces with the knowledgeinstitutes to foster innovations. Now biodiversity in our rivers is thrivingagain, and these waters are safe for agricultural andrecreational use.The Netherlands is committed to contributing to aworld where disputes over water are settled in consultationwith those concerned. Our long-lasting supportto river basin organizations and programmes directed attransboundary management of river basins such as theNile, the Mekong and the Senegal rivers, are an exampleof this commitment. By their transboundary nature, thesemulti-country water resources represent regional publicgoods that provide national water and food security, andthe protection of important international ecosystems.The Netherlands development cooperation programmefurther supports water programmes in Kenya, Ghana,Benin, Mali, Ethiopia and South Sudan, in addition tointegrated delta management programmes in Egypt,Indonesia, Bangladesh, Mozambique, and Viet Nam.In March 2013 the Netherlands hosted the celebrationof World Water Day, as part of the United Nations asthe International Year of Water Cooperation. A strongappeal was made to the world community to ensurewater security and a sustainable future for all. It wasrecommended that water security should be establishedas a sustainable development goal to which the worldwill commit itself from 2015.“Thousands have lived without love, not one withoutwater”, the poet W. H. Auden once famously said. Waterscarcity and poor water quality may in future devastatethe most sacred thing given to us: human life andhuman dignity. Based on our history of integrated watermanagement, and our experience with risk assessments,spatial planning, adaptation strategies (including watersafety, fresh water supply and developing resilient urbanareas) as well as international water governance, theNetherlands stands ready to work in partnership withother countries for a water secure world. Tomorrow’sworld demands nothing less.[ 198 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONCooperating to manage liquid waste in theOkavango Delta Ramsar SiteMichael Ramaano, Project Manager, Global Water Partnership Botswana Secretariat;Nkobi Mpho Moleele, Project Manager, Okavango Research InstituteThe Okavango Delta, in Botswana, is one of the world’slargest inland water systems and was placed on theRamsar list of wetlands of international importancein 1997. While the ecological integrity of this wetland is stilllargely intact, there are signs that anthropogenic pressuresendanger this. For instance, as the population grows andurbanizes, risks associated with the disposal of liquid wasteand transport of hazardous substances, such as petrol anddiesel, are of increasing concern.The Okavango Delta Ramsar Site covers nearly one tenth of Botswanaand is the heart of the country’s tourism industry, hosting manycamps and facilities for visitors to the wetlands. For the Okavangoto continue supporting its inhabitants, its unique biodiversity andthe tourist industry, which accounts for 12 per cent of Botswana’sgross domestic product, activities within the Delta must protect theenvironment from harm.The Okavango Delta is a diverse, complex ecosystem with a widerange of resources and users, governed by many institutions undernumerous national laws, policies and guidelines, regional and internationalconventions, agreements and protocols. Pollution is a majorpotential threat. Of the various rules and regulations on waste disposaland hazardous substances, none specifically address the issues ofmanaging liquid waste, or transporting, handling and storing dangeroussubstances in the Okavango. There was, therefore, a need for aset of guidelines to be created, tailored to the special requirementsof the Okavango Delta Ramsar Site. Such guidelines could guidecommunities and tourist operations within the Delta in preventingpollution. The biggest challenge in developing these kinds of guidelines,however, is getting buy-in from those interested or affected.Since its establishment in 1996, the Global Water Partnership(GWP), an international network of organizations working onwater-related issues, has spearheaded cooperation initiatives tobring together individuals, communities, institutions and governmentsto tackle complex challenges related to water resourcesmanagement, sanitation and pollution across the globe. GWPprovides a neutral space for stakeholders to share ideas andsolve problems. The partnership is also a channel for cooperation.GWP fosters the exchange of knowledge and skills betweencommunities and countries, helping them to adapt and implementsuccessful water management solutions to maximize economicand social welfare without compromising the sustainability ofenvironmental systems. The GWP network has 13 RegionalWater Partnerships, 84 Country Water Partnerships and 2,770partner organizations in 167 countries.Very aware that liquid waste could lead to considerablepollution in the Okavango, GWP Botswana graspeda window of opportunity offered by the Integrated WaterResource Management – Water Efficiency Project, andBuilding Local Capacity for the Sustainable Use andConservation of Biodiversity in the Okavango Delta(Biokavango) Project. Both of these projects are sponsoredby the Global Environment Fund, United NationsDevelopment Programme and the Government ofBotswana to foster the cooperation needed to tackle thepotential problem.As a first step, the partners set out to map themagnitude of the problem and the various stakeholders.With an understanding of who was involved andtheir concerns, the next step was to bring stakeholderstogether to find acceptable solutions, which they wouldbe likely to take on board.Stakeholders included officials from theDepartment of Waste Management and PollutionControl, Department of Water Affairs, Department ofEnvironmental Affairs, Department of Wildlife andNational Parks, North West District Council, TawanaLand Board and the Department of Tourism. Each ofthese government bodies has regulations coveringvarious aspects of water or pollution. Private sectorstakeholders, such as tourist guides and companiesthat operate tourist facilities and transport hazardoussubstances within the Delta, have a commercial interest.Non-governmental organizations such as SankuyoTshwaragano Management Trust, Khwai DevelopmentTrust, Mababe Conservation Trust, Okavango PolersTrust and Kalahari Conservation Society representcivil society concerns. Parastatal institutions such asthe Botswana Tourism Organisation and BotswanaMeat Commission are concerned with economicdevelopment. Local and regional development projectsactive in the Delta, such as the United States Agencyfor International Development-sponsored SouthernAfrican Regional Environment Programme, are interestedin both social and economic development. TheOkavango Research Institute, a wing of the Universityof Botswana, is a centre for the study and conservationof wetland ecosystems. Each of these various groupshas a stake in managing liquid waste and dangeroussubstances to protect the Okavango from pollution.[ 199 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Claudia Uribe/Photodisc/Getty ImagesThe Okavango Delta Ramsar Site in Botswana is being protected from the risk of pollutionOpen and inclusive discussions arranged by GWP Botswana aspart of the two projects allowed these different parties to voice theirconcerns and explore ways of keeping the risk of pollution to aminimum. Representatives of the tourist industry, for example,explained that their difficulties in dealing with liquid waste lay inoperating in remote areas, the plethora of different institutions theyhad to deal with and unfamiliarity with some of the technical issuesin treating liquid waste.The outcome of the discussions was agreement that it wouldbe useful to produce a set of guidelines for managing liquid wastein the Okavango Delta Ramsar Site. Following up on this, theIntegrated Water Resource Management-Water Efficiency Project,GWP Botswana and Biokavango Project approached the North WestDistrict Council, Department of Water Affairs and the Departmentof Waste Management and Pollution Control with a proposal todevelop such a set of guidelines. The guidelines would be a steptowards safeguarding water quality and the environment by minimizingcontamination from inadequately treated sewage and otherliquid waste.A Botswana consultancy Ecosurv was tasked with developing theguidelines. In drawing up the guidelines, the consultants ensuredthey conformed to national standards and international obligations.The Okavango Delta Management Plan Waste Management Strategyand a 2008 Biokavango Project Report assessing liquid wastesystems in tourism establishments and transport, and handling andstorage of hazardous substances in the Okavango Delta, provideda solid foundation for Ecosurv to develop recommendations forthe guidelines. The guidelines considered the main ecotypes inthe Okavango – as different eco-environments needdifferent approaches to wastewater treatment – andrecommended that requirements for managing liquidwaste should become stricter from dry land to wetland.In open fresh water and perennial swamps, there shouldbe no discharge of liquid waste at all.The guidelines also took account of the enormousvariation in the amounts of liquid waste produced andtreated, ranging from large volumes by council wastewatertreatment plants, schools, hospitals, commerceand hotels, to small volumes by lodges and camps, campsites, mobile operators, rural communities and privatehomes. The different set ups vary in the volume of wastethey generate and each requires different guidelines.The guidelines considered site conditions, expectedwastewater generation rates, desirable effluent quality,construction costs and maintenance requirements –everything from selecting sites for treatment plantsto developing, operating and decommissioning them.Sophisticated liquid waste treatment facilities wouldneed to be serviced and maintained by skilled staff andwould create difficulties in small isolated communities.In these cases, low-maintenance septic tank soak-awaysystems could be more reliable. Powered sludge systemswould not be suitable for off-grid areas or where solarelectricity would be too costly to install.As well as the need to manage liquid waste, thereis a need to manage the storage and movement of[ 200 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONSummary of liquid waste management guidelines for theOkavango Delta Ramsar SiteAssessing risk• Assess the level of pollution based on the quantity of liquid wastegenerated and site classification.• Confirm the level of risk by obtaining coordinates of the site andsuperimposing them on the groundwater vulnerability map.Selecting technology• Consult the flow chart for technology selection for medium- to highpollutionrisk to identify suitable technologies for the site underconsideration on the basis of the possible pollution risk.• Where the risk is considered low, all technologies are considered suitable.• In the case where a conservancy tank is used, there must be provision forvacuum tanker services.• The final decision on technology will depend on affordability to the developer.Licensing• All liquid waste management facilities posing a medium- to high-risk to theenvironment need to be licensed by a competent authority.• Two types of licences should be applicable: Licence A for medium risk andLicence B for high risk.• In applying for a licence, the applicant should indicate whether they areapplying for Licence A or B.• Each licence application should be accompanied by an environmentalmanagement plan.• Each application for a licence should be accompanied by a licenceapplication report.Managing sewage water in on-land camping grounds and on houseboats• Ensure that long-drop holes are dug on organic soil.• The dimensions of the long-drop must not exceed 30 cm 2 by 1.5 m deep.• The hole should be filled in with soil when it is 30 cm from full.• There must be one toilet per eight persons.• Locate long-drop holes at least 100 m from water sources to avoidcontamination.• Avoid high concentrations of long-drop holes around campsites.• All houseboats shall be equipped with at least two liquid waste tanks ofadequate capacity to handle liquid waste for the duration of the trip.• All liquid waste tanks should be leak and overflow proof.• Offshore tanks used for transferring liquid waste from houseboats shouldapply for Licence A.• The Hospitality and Tourism Association of Botswana and Botswana GuidesAssociation should ensure that their members comply with these protocols.Managing greywater in on-land camping grounds and on houseboats• No greywater should be discharged into the receiving water bodies,including the Delta, without prior treatment.• Greywater should be retained on board houseboats for disposal into landbasedsystems.• The Hospitality and Tourism Association of Botswana and Botswana GuidesAssociation should ensure that their members comply with these protocols.Summary of guidelines for managing hazardouswaste in the Okavango Delta Ramsar SiteTransporting hazardous waste• Vehicles transporting hazardous waste should be certifiedroadworthy by the Department of Road Transport andSafety every six months.• Drums and truck-box fuel tanks are acceptable methods oftransporting oil and fuel.• All vehicles carrying fuel should have at least one 20 B:Crated portable fire extinguisher.• Drums and fuel tanks should be filled to a recommendedlevel of 90 per cent.• The load should be secured in a manner, which ensuresthat it does not escape from the vehicle or shift or sway in amanner that may affect the operation of the vehicle.Storing hazardous liquid waste• Fuel storage tanks, whether above ground or underground,should be located down slope from water sources.• Above-ground tanks should be located over an impermeableliner made of concrete or other synthetic material.• All underground tanks should be coated with fibreglass toprevent corrosion, or use fibreglass tanks instead.• Above-ground tanks should be made of high quality steel.• Fuel tanks should have spill and overfill protection.• Spill protection typically consists of a catch basin forcollecting spills when the tank is filled.• Overfill protection is a warning, such as a buzzer or an automaticshutoff, to prevent an overflow when the tank is filled.• Store similar products together to reduce any danger fromreactions in case of leakage or spill.• Store substances in a well-ventilated area.Handling and disposing of hazardous liquid waste• All containers storing hazardous substances should be in agood condition and clearly labelled.• Containers and tanks should be closed and sealed exceptwhere a hazardous substance is being added or removedfrom the container.• Storage tanks at marine fuel dispensing stations must be located4.5 m horizontally from the normal annual high-water mark.• Solid piping must be used between on-shore storage tanks.• Use a funnel when transferring substances between containers.• Provide a stable platform for fuelling.• Follow the directions for storage on the label.• Used oil should not be mixed with other hazardous substances.• Never burn, dump or bury hazardous liquid waste.• Do not flush waste down sinks or toilets.• Do not pour hazardous liquid waste into ditches, stormdrains or gutters.• Completely drain all oil filters to ensure that they do notcontain hazardous substances.hazardous substances in the Delta. Biodiversity-friendly guidelinescritical to managing the risk of pollution from storage, spillage andleakage were also drafted.Ecosurv delivered very comprehensive draft guidelines inSeptember 2011. In 2012 the draft guidelines were circulated amongstakeholders for them to review and make suggestions as to howthey could be improved. The initial reaction was that the guidelineswere too long and complicated and, because of this, they would bedifficult to implement. Feedback from various quarters suggestedsimplifying the technical sections and clarifying the mandates, rolesand responsibilities of the different bodies involved in implementingthe guidelines. Licensing and processes for renewing licenses,for example, needed to be streamlined. The guidelines also neededto align with existing environmental management plans. Feedbackgave useful pointers as to overcoming barriers to puttingthe guidelines into practice.The guidelines were redrafted by Aqualogic tobe simpler and more user friendly. Flow charts takereaders step by step through what needs to be done.Clear diagrams show the correct way to build, forexample, septic tanks or drainage ponds. The guidelineshave now been finalised and are being piloted.In piloting the guidelines in the Okavango DeltaRamsar Site, some important lessons have emerged.One is that managing liquid waste not only needs tobe tackled in the Okavango Delta Ramsar Site, it is alsoa problem that needs to be tackled across Botswanaand throughout the entire Okavango River Basin. In[ 201 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: mostphotos.com/lekseleGuidelines for managing liquid waste and hazardous substances help keep the Okavango Delta ecosystem safe from pollutionBotswana, the Department of Waste Management and PollutionControl is already using the guidelines throughout the country andpushing for them to be codified in laws such as the EnvironmentalImpact Assessment Act, Tourism Licensing Act, Land Board Act andBuildings Control Act.The Okavango River Basin is shared by two other countries:Namibia and Angola. To protect the Okavango Delta, the part of thebasin which lies in Botswana, the countries upstream need to managethe risk of pollution by undertaking similar cooperative exercises anddeveloping guidelines for their particular circumstances. In order toscale up lessons learned in the Okavango Delta across the basin, GWPBotswana is working through regional networks, such as the SouthernAfrica Regional Environmental Programme (SAREP), to share experiencesof how the guidelines for the Okavango Delta Ramsar Site workin practice. The guidelines are being used in SAREP projects in theOkavango River Basin and in work to improve transboundary cooperationon water in Southern Africa.Because those with a stake in the well-being of the OkavangoDelta worked cooperatively to develop the guidelines, they are likelyto find the guidelines useful, to put them into practice and evenperhaps to encourage others to do so. Where there has been potentialfor conflict and breakdown of communication, the approachtaken by GWP Botswana has instead encouraged understanding andcollaboration. Barriers dissolved as people were given the space andtime to listen, and be listened to.Many of the problems affecting wetlands stem from the failure ofusers to cooperate. In the Okavango Delta Ramsar Site, what wasneeded to prevent pollution was to bring water users together toreach a common understanding of the problems, anddiscuss possible solutions and ways forward. Changingthe way water is managed takes time and requirescommitment and contributions from many parties.Celebrating water cooperation is therefore an importantmanifestation of what partnerships can do at all levelsfrom the local to the global.Hippos grazing near the Okavango DeltaImage: mostphotos.com/ericschmiedl[ 202 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONWater cooperation in KoreaBoosik Kang, Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Dankook University and Korea Water Resources AssociationWater cooperation requires a series of international andlocal actors to work together to secure better waterservices. Korea’s practices on water cooperationinclude its involvement in international water events, such ashosting the 7th World Water Forum in 2015, and an increase ofits official development assistance (ODA) in the water sector. Thelaunch of the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project (Four RiversProject) in 2009-2012 illustrates Korea’s technical and strategicvision on how to overcome water challenges in the face of climatechange, and its commitment to aiding developing countries basedon its experience of the project. Korea is committed to multistakeholdercooperation for water decision-making.The Environmental Outlook to 2050 published by the Organisationfor Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) evaluated theRepublic of Korea as the highest water-stressed country among the 34OECD members. Korea abstracted more than 40 per cent of its totalaverage renewable water yield in 2009, putting its water balance atrisk. The country receives 60-70 per cent of its total annual precipitationin the flood season from June to September, while severe droughtsfrequently occur in spring and winter. These phenomena requiresophisticated and careful water resources management systems.Confronted with such challenges, the Korean Government has continuedto undertake technology development and investment in orderto provide a high level of water services and secure water resourcesthrough structural and non-structural methods. TheGovernment has also striven to foster water industriesand support developing countries through ODA projects.Korea’s engagement in water cooperation at the internationallevel has a rather short history, but has accelerated inrecent years. One of the most significant achievements isKorea’s successful bid to host the 7th World Water Forum,which will be held in Daegu-Gyeongbuk in 2015. More than30,000 people from over 200 countries are expected to attendthe event. The five institutions of Korea – the Ministry ofLand, Infrastructure and Transportation, K-water, the KoreaWater Forum, the Korea Water Resources Association(KWRA) and the Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) –were elected to the Board of Governors of the World WaterCouncil (WWC) at the meeting of the United NationsGeneral Assembly in Marseilles, France in 2012. The boardconsists of 36 members and advises the council’s overallstrategy and work scope. The Republic of Korea is nowhome to the largest number of WWC governors.Another example can be found in Korea’s effort tosupport the establishment of water and environmentrelatedinternational institutions within the country.Examples include the Green Climate Fund of theUnited Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange; GGGI; the United Nations InternationalImages: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and TransportMultipurpose weirs in Korea’s four major rivers, clockwise from top left: Yeoju Weir, Han River; Chilgok Weir, Nakdong River;Seungchon Weir, Youngsan River; and Buyeo Weir, Geum River[ 203 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONStrategy for Disaster Reduction North-East Asian Office; the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Climate Center; and theInternational Water Association’s North-East Asia Office.Korea received about US$12.7 billion of foreign aid between 1945and 1999, but paid off all the loans to the World Bank in 1995. Sincethen, it has become a donor country. This unprecedented transformationfrom aid recipient to donor country culminated in Korea’s joiningthe OECD Development Assistance Committee in 2009. Korea hascontinued to show its commitment to socioeconomic developmentas well as environmental protection in various fields such as waterresources management, environmental protection, poverty eradication,public health improvement, help for refugees and support for women’sdevelopment. Relevant programmes and projects have been conductedby the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA). Even thoughKorean ODA was estimated as 0.12 per cent of gross national income(GNI) in 2012, which is less than that of Japan and the United States,the country has pledged to double its ODA budget until 2015.With regard to Korea’s ODA towards the water sector, relevantprogrammes promote various water projects for developing countries ina variety of fields, including drinking water development in Africa, floodprevention, water and sanitation projects and agriculturalwater security in South-East Asia, dam construction foragricultural water supply, and the construction and renovationof irrigation canals in Central and South America.Korea is investing a significant amount in research anddevelopment in the water sector to transfer advancedtechnologies, management know-how and institutionalframeworks to developing countries.The noticeable economic growth of APEC, the politicalstability of the Commonwealth of Independent Statesand the rapid growth of Chinese capital markets haveimproved the political and economic status of surroundingcountries. Therefore, it is essential to promote long-terminternational water cooperation in order to maximize thenational benefit by exchanging experiences and technologiesamong countries facing increasing need for theplanning, construction, operation and management ofwater infrastructure. Despite the volatile political statusbetween North and South Korea, there is also undeniablya new era of cooperation, with an increasing need for infra-Primary grants awarded by KOICAGrantDetailed design of hydropower plant in River Modi, NepalDetailed design of Chamelia Hydropower Plant, NepalFeasibility study of Tadsalen Hydropower, LaosLevee construction in River Mekong, LaosLevee restoration and water park, Vientiane, LaosFeasibility study and detailed design of Karian Multipurpose Dam, IndonesiaWatershed survey of River Bunha; Feasibility study of Maiyeker Dam, ChinaRestoration of multipurpose reservoirs, CambodiaWater resources development in the Krang Ponley Basin, CambodiaIntegrated water resources development planning, CambodiaConstruction of Muana Small Hydropower PlantPotable water development, EthiopiaBorena well development, EthiopiaPotable water development in Kiltheaurello, Tigria, EthiopiaWell development and maintenance, KenyaAssembo water purification plant, KenyaPotable water development, TanzaniaFeasibility study of portable water development and water supply systems, PeriModernization of water supply and sewage system, IraqPeriod1993-42000-21996-719972006-72004-61994-62002-42004-52006-81997-91995-620062007-82006-72007-92006-82004-62005-7Budget (US$ million)0.730.630.180.360.801.520.791.370.741.490.200.800.251.750.372.421.500.706.00Source: KOICA[ 204 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONstructure in Unified Korea. In addition, the socioeconomic growth ofSouth Korea has led to increasing needs for water resources and sanitaryfacilities. Since 1999, when South Korea became a donor country,opportunities for international water cooperation have increased.In 1991, KOICA was established to set up a grant for developingand underdeveloped countries. International water cooperation inKorea can be divided into direct and indirect cooperation. Directcooperation is divided into a grant and a concessional loan. Thegrant is managed by KOICA and the loan is managed by the Export-Import Bank of Korea. Indirect cooperation is managed by theMinistry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Strategy and Finance.The number of primary grants is rapidly increasing today.In addition, the International Hydrological Programme (IHP) of theUnited Nations started with the support of the Ministry of Constructionand Transport in 1997, and is now in its seventh phase entitled ‘WaterDependencies: Systems under Stress and Societal Responses’. SouthKorea has been listed on the IHP National Committee since 2002, andwas re-elected in 2010. It is now an executive member of the Asia-Pacific region (Group IV) along with Japan, the Philippines, Malaysia,Pakistan, Iran and North Korea. In 2003, South Korea also joinedthe Network of Asian River Basin Organizations, which helps waterresources-related organizations and government agencies such as riverbasin organizations in developing countries to promote technologicalexchange programmes on water resources operation and management.In Thailand, the National Water Resources and Flood PolicyCommittee (NWRFPC), led by the Prime Minister, was establishedin 2012. Since the great flood in 2001, NWRFPC has been working onthe integrated water resources management of 25 rivers in Thailandincluding the Chao Phraya River, in which a number of Koreanorganizations are involved. Moreover, the experience of the FourRivers Project in Korea triggered international technical exchangeprogrammes among other countries such as Morocco and Paraguay.In order to facilitate transboundary water cooperation in the MekongRiver Basin, GGGI and KWRA have been working together since 2012on the Green Growth Framework for Water Resources Managementin the Mekong River Basin project. The overall objective of the projectis to enhance the capacity of the riparian countries (Cambodia, LaoPeople’s Democratic Republic, Thailand and Viet Nam)and the Mekong River Commission Secretariat to implementthe green growth policy framework in relation towater resources development at the national and basinlevels. The project is expected to establish an appropriatewater and green growth framework model that can beapplied to transboundary water basins at the global level.It is worth taking a closer look at the most significantwater project, the Four Rivers Project in Korea. Theproject aims to restore the ecological functions of the fourmajor rivers, which have been degraded and disturbed byanthropogenic activities, especially during the period ofindustrialization since the 1960s. It is regarded as a usefulreference for developing countries. The project has beenevaluated as good practice in the OECD EnvironmentalOutlook to 2050, which praised it as a comprehensiveapproach to managing water resources in rivers and achievinggreen growth through water. The Four Rivers Project isa multipurpose water project to achieve water security andprevent water-related natural disasters such as floods anddroughts that often take place owing to climate change.The Four Rivers Project provides a total solution forriver restoration. Its five key objectives are to:• implement comprehensive flood control• secure a sufficient amount of water resourcesagainst potential water scarcity• improve water quality and restore the ecosystems inand around the rivers• create multifunctional areas for local residents• prepare for further revitalization of the riversystems by local authorities in the future.The project will renew and rehabilitate a total 929 km ofthe four rivers. Subsequent projects, which will be administeredby local governments, will restore more than 10,000km of local streams and 39 riparian wetlands. The totalbudget for the project is estimated at US$ 19.2 billion.The Four Rivers Project: measures and effectsFlood controlWater securityWater quality improvementEcological restorationWaterfront developmentMeasuresDredging: 450 million m 3Detentions: 5 placesReinforcing dilapidated levees: 784 kmMovable weirs: 16Dams: 2Elevating agricultural reservoir banks: 96Sewage treatment facilities: 1,281Total-phosphorus treatment facilities: 233Ecological wetlands: 11.8 million m 2Fish-ways: 33 sitesBicycle paths: 1,757 kmTourist attraction sites: 36EffectsLowering flood water levels (2-4 m)Secure 1.3 billion m 3 of waterSwimmable water 76% - 86%Improve natural ecology & promote eco-tourismBetter quality of lifeSource: MLTM, 2009[ 205 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONFlood hazard mitigation is a prime objective for the project. Climatechange has triggered record highs in torrential rainfall and large-scaletyphoons in recent years. For example, in 2011 more than 1,800mm of annual precipitation was recorded in Korea, which usuallyreceives an average annual precipitation of around 1,240 mm. Thanksto the project, flood water levels under the heavy summer stormswere reduced by 1.31 m on average and 4.45 m at the maximum. Anextraordinary flood event like the one in 2011 could occur at any timedue to climate change. The outcomes of the Four Rivers Project willcontinue to be monitored and evaluated in the future.Rivers are the arteries of a nation and the foundation for socioeconomicdevelopment. The Four Rivers Project will be able toincorporate the overall enhancement of water supply, flood prevention,water quality and ecosystems into culture, tourism and historyat the local level to buttress local economies with an emphasis oneach riparian characteristic. The project provides an example of howgreen initiatives can revive the environment, economy and society.In spite of the global economic downturn beginning in 2008, Koreahas invested 2 per cent of gross domestic product every year in the greensector from 2009 to 2013, and has allocated US$19.2 billion to the FourRivers Project in order to promote economic growth and advancedwater management. In response to the growing interest of developingcountries in emulating Korean water management practices, the KoreanGovernment has been in contact with Algeria and Thailand to helpresolve complex water challenges based on experience of the project.In a national context, one of the recent policy efforts to facilitatewater cooperation in Korea was the revision of the Korea Water Vision(2000-2010) in 2006. This case delineates the extent to which watercooperation between the Government and civil society can create democraticdecision-making mechanisms based on governance. The visionwas first established in 1999 in accordance with the River Law, buthad been heavily criticized by non-state actors, particularly environmentalnon-governmental organizations (NGOs), for its undemocraticdecision-making process. As a result, environmental NGOs and othersocial groups refused to accept the statistics and figures in the vision,particularly in terms of the level of water scarcity the country might facein a decade. They were concerned that such data might legitimize theGovernment’s conventional approach to resolving water supply issuesby augmenting more dams in the future regardless of the dams’ detrimentalimpacts on overall ecosystems.Faced with such criticism, the central Government decided to invitediverse stakeholders at both central and local levels and began establishingwater cooperation mechanisms based on consensus building throughmulti-stakeholder dialogue. In 2003, initiated by the Government, theWater Supply Preparation Committee was set up, comprising relevantministries, research institutions and groups from civil society, and theKorea Water Vision Committee was also created in May 2004.It was emphasized that the new system should encourage all the relevantstakeholders to take an active part not only in exchanging theirviews and opinions, but also in the early stage of planning. For instance,the expert subcommittee appointed a chairperson who convened meetings.All the stakeholders were given related data and information onwater supply and explored options based on thorough analyses andevaluations. Such practices effectively reflected important principles ofwater cooperation based on governance – namely multi-stakeholderparticipation, transparency and information sharing – and entailed theremoval of distrust between the state and civil society.Some 45 subcommittee meetings took place in two years. Theprocess of decision-making was painstaking and time consuming, butit was a sound social learning process in which the state,civil society, experts and ordinary citizens understooddifferent parties’ interests and concerns. The experiencealso implies an establishment of democratic decisionmakingin which stakeholders became more accustomedto reaching a consensus through persuasion and discussion.More importantly, this exercise had culminated inthe creation of the centre-local network for water cooperation,and central government officials began to have agood understanding of local water issues.Korea’s contribution to the promotion of water cooperationat the international level has gradually increased,and this trend will continue. There is growing recognitionwithin the country that it is time for Korea to commititself to aiding the international community, particularlydeveloping countries, in supporting socioeconomic developmentand environmental sustainability. Institutionaland technical experiences in sustainable water managementin Korea will pave the way for developing countriesto emulate management practices for their own long-termeconomic, societal and environmental development.Case study: the Four Rivers ProjectBefore restoration (top): the Nakdong River’s narrow widthmeans the the upper reaches suffer from droughts whilethe lower reaches are prone to floods.After restoration (bottom): the Four Rivers Project willbegin at the Nakdong River, revitalizing cities and creatinga world-class tourism beltImages: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport[ 206 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONWater expertise and cooperation:Hungary’s international policyDr Gábor Baranyai, Chair of Organizing Committee, Budapest Water Summit, and Deputy State Secretary,EU Sectoral Policies, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, HungaryHungarians’ special relationship with water must flowfrom the particular geographical features of the country.Hungary is a landlocked country lying in the middleof one of the world’s largest closed topographical units: theCarpathian Basin. The Alpine ranges surrounding Hungarydischarge water through 24 watercourses into the predominantlyflat country, but water leaves only through three major rivers:the River Danube and two of its tributaries, the rivers Tisza andDráva. As a result, one quarter of the country is exposed to floods,which is exceptional in Europe. However, this abundance of wateris counterbalanced by the relatively dry continental climate of thebasin. Thus, floods and droughts may follow each other with afrequency unknown in other parts of the world.Hungary is also rich in groundwater resources. The huge unpollutedunderground reserves along the Danube, north and south ofthe capital city of Budapest, provide affordable drinkingwater for almost 3 million people. The region’sabundant thermal water resources have also beenexploited since Roman times. Alone in Budapest, over68 million litres of water bubble into 118 springsand boreholes every day. The ‘city of spas’ offers anastounding array of baths, from the Ottoman hamamto neo-baroque bathing palaces.As a result of its outstanding exposure to diversehydrological challenges, Hungary has historicallydeveloped significant expertise in water management.To safeguard its water resources, the countryhas introduced a stringent legal regime and a solidinstitutional framework in water and sanitationmanagement. Centuries of tradition in this area havebeen supported by a solid academic, educational andThe Carpathian BasinHungary’s geography has created a special relationship with waterSource: Somlyódy, 2002[ 207 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONcontrol, monitoring, exchange of hydrological andmeteorological data, and more. Decades of technicaland expert-level cooperation under the bilateral agreementshave developed into a well-functioning andprofessional system of coordinated water resourcesmanagement, a prerequisite for safeguarding the country’sfragile water balance.The entire territory of Hungary lies in the Danubecatchment area, which is not only the most internationalriver basin (involving 19 countries), but also boasts oneof the world’s most sophisticated institutional systemsof transboundary river basin cooperation. The cornerstonesof such cooperation are the 1994 Sofia DanubeRiver Protection Convention and the Water FrameworkDirective of the EU (even those countries that are notmembers of the EU have signed up to the implementationof the Water Framework Directive).The main interface for the cooperation of Danubecountries is the International Commission for theProtection of the River Danube (ICPDR), comprising14 countries and the EU. ICPDR is not only a coordinationmechanism; it also issues recommendations ona wide range of subjects including water quality, floodmanagement, nature conservation and energy production,and monitors their implementation. The successof ICPDR has inspired the creation of a number ofother river basin cooperation platforms in south-eastEurope, such as the Sava Commission or the DrinaRiver Committee.Hungary has also been an active promoter of theinstitutionalization of international water cooperationat pan-European level. Under the auspices of theUnited Nations Economic Commission for Europe,Hungary has launched and sponsored several initiativesto strengthen the legal and professional basis ofcross-border water management. Hungary will host thetriannual meeting of the parties of the 1992 Conventionon the Protection and Use of TransboundaryWatercourses and International Lakes in 2015. Thecountry was among the initiators of two of the protocolsof the 1992 convention: the 1999 Water and HealthProtocol and the 2003 Protocol on Civil Liability. It isalso a party to the 1997 UN Convention on the Law ofNon-navigational Uses of International Watercourses.Hungary has been a member of the EU since 2004.The EU maintains the most stringent international legalregime on water protection and management, coveringthe entire water cycle and the widest possible rangeof human and economic activities. Its most importantlegal instrument – the Water Framework Directive– introduces a legal obligation to achieve ‘good waterstatus’ by 2015 (a range of measurable ecological,chemical and quantitative criteria) as well as to prepareand implement joint river basin management plans fortransboundary catchment areas.Having remained committed to keeping water issueshigh on the EU’s political agenda, Hungary chose wateras a priority area for political action during its rotatingpresidency of the EU in 2011. Under Hungary’s leadertrainingbackground. Hungarian experts have excelled in planningand implementing complex water management systems in developingcountries ranging from Mongolia to Algeria, and from Brazil toEthiopia. Supporting water-related development projects is a distinguishedarea of Hungary’s international cooperation policy.With 96 per cent of the country’s surface water arriving fromabroad, international water cooperation is an eminent nationalsecurity, economic and nature conservation imperative for Hungary.Some 700 settlements, 2.5 million people, 40 per cent of the country’sagricultural land and 2,000 industrial plants (indirectly about30 per cent of the nation’s gross domestic product) are potentiallyaffected by floods originating beyond the country’s borders. Nowonder Hungary has been a pioneer of international water cooperationboth at basin and global level. Hungary maintains bilateralwater cooperation agreements with all of its seven neighbours(Austria, Croatia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine).These agreements aim to contribute, among other things, to:• the achievement of ‘good water status’ (a complex set ofchemical, ecological and quantitative objectives laid down bythe European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive)• prevention and control of water pollution• prevention, mitigation and containment of negativetransboundary effects (floods, pollution incidents)• development and maintenance of monitoring andevaluation systems• coordination of the sustainable utilization of water resources• research and development.These objectives are implemented through detailed technicalprotocols on water quality emergencies, flood managementSzéchenyi thermal bath and swimming pool in Budapest: the region enjoysabundant thermal water resourcesImage: Hungarian Investment and Trade Agency[ 208 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONThe Danube catchment areaThe 19 countries of the Danube catchment area have a sophisticated transboundary river basin cooperation systemSource: INTERACT Programmeship the EU’s environment and international development ministersadopted conclusions highlighting the challenges, objectives andmeans of the union’s internal and external water-related activities.Ministers also renewed their commitment to the EU Water Initiative,the flagship European international development policy tool in thefield of water and sanitation.Hungary plays a central role in the implementation of the EU’scomprehensive development strategy for the entire region: theDanube Region Strategy, adopted by the union’s leader during theHungarian presidency in June 2011. It is a macroregional strategyof 14 EU, accession and neighbourhood countries situated in thebasin and sub-basins of the Danube River. Its main priorities aresocioeconomic development; the improvement of competitiveness;environmental management and resource efficiency; security; and themodernization of transport corridors. These are implemented throughpriority areas and concrete actions. Hungary acts as priority area coordinatorfor two important, water-related topics of the Danube RegionStrategy: water quality and the management of environmental risks.Understanding that transboundary river basins have great potentialfor cooperation irrespective of how geographically distantthey are from each other, Hungary organized the first Asia-EuropeMeeting Sustainable Development Seminar on the Role of Waterin Sustainable Regional Development Strategies in June 2012. Theseminar used the showcase of the Danube Region Strategy and theGreater Mekong Subregion as a basis for future cooperation andcomprehensive interaction among regional development strategies.At the seminar, great emphasis was placed on sustainable watermanagement and the role of water in other development-relatedissues, as well as on possible interregional cooperationand experience sharing between the macroregions ofthe Danube and Mekong river valleys.Naturally, Hungary does not see water as an isolatedsubject, but as an integral part of global sustainabledevelopment policy. Thus in the run-up to the2012 United Nations Conference on SustainableDevelopment (Rio+20) Hungary, as a steering committeemember of the Friends of Water Group in NewYork, took an active role in promoting water in thepre-conference political discussions. The group hasorganized thematic discussions prior to the Rio+20conference, with the goal of bringing added valueto formal sustainable development deliberationsthrough pragmatic and results-oriented presentations.As co-chair of the United Nations General AssemblyOpen Working Group on Sustainable DevelopmentGoals (SDGs), Hungary remains a driver of the elaborationof a water-related SDG. To that end the countryhas organized the 2013 Budapest Water Summit, a keyinternational gathering aiming to shape the content ofa stand-alone SDG on water.Against this background, it is only natural that waterrelatedprojects have been at the core of Hungarianinternational development assistance for decades.Between 1975 and 1990 experts of the former WaterResources Management Centre (VIKÖZ, later VGI),together with Mongolian partners, prepared the Water[ 209 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONWater-related projects have been at the centre of Hungarian internationaldevelopment assistance for decadesImage: VIKUV Water Prospecting and Drilling Joint-stock CompanyHungary’s water pioneersPál Vásárhelyi (1795-1846)elaborated, among others, theplans of the Iron Gate (Vaskapu)on the River Danube regulationand the River Tisza regulation.By 1846 he had prepared acomprehensive regulation conceptcurrently known as Vásárhelyi’sTisza Regulation Plan.As an engineer of hydraulics,the name of Emil Mosonyi(1910-2009) is connected todams and hydropower plantsaround the world. He washonorary professor at a numberof universities and a member ofvarious science academies. TheUniversity of Auckland in NewZealand established the MosonyiPrize to honour his work in thefield of sustainable hydropowerdevelopment.In the second half of the nineteenthcentury, Vilmos Zsigmondy (1821-1888) drilled a well in Budapest(City Park). The well, which was 970metres deep and had a capacityof 2,200 litres per hour at 74 o C,was the second largest in Europeat that time and was consideredsomething of a sensation.Images: The Hungarian Water and Sanitation Industry in the 21st century, HITA, 2013Management Master Plan of Mongolia and the regional master plansfor the following basins:• Mongolian Great Lakes• River Khovd• River Dzabhan• River Kherlen (Kerulen)• Ongijn• Taats• Baidrag rivers.The Mongolian parliament appraised this activity as the ‘Project ofthe Century’ many years after the Hungarian experts had finishedtheir projects and the Hungarian-Mongolian Water ManagementCooperation Agreement was renewed in 2008. Hungarian experts haveexecuted master plans in Tanzania, Nigeria and Morocco, where theyalso managed reservoir construction. Experts have similarly served ashigh-level advisers in Algeria and Kuwait. By 1980, Hungarian hydrologistsand engineers had assisted Mongolia in solving water problems onthe steppe. Hungarian engineers and hydrologists trained and workedclosely with Mongolian young professionals. By 1970, 225 new wellshad been drilled to a depth of 100-200 metres. In connection with waterprospecting, the experts executed geophysical exploration on an area of21,000 km 2 . In the 1970s Hungarian experts provided help in Viet Namand in Mongolia, installing MA-200 type irrigation equipment (about150 pumping plants across Mongolia, and in the Ba Vi irrigation systemin Viet Nam). They provided training and services for maintaining theinstalled irrigation capacities. In Morocco, in the frame of international,technical and scientific cooperation, Hungarian experts were involved inthe construction of the River Moulouya and Rabat regionirrigation systems. Since the 1980s Hungarian consultantsVIZITERV and MÉLYÉPTERV have taken part in differentirrigation projects in Algeria and Tunisia (irrigation ofpalm groves), Yemen (Tihama and Taiz projects), Sudan(Djebel Marra project) and Iran (Gorgan Valley).Recent water related development projects implementedby Hungarian Government assistance include the creationof a water management and irrigation system in the KoboGirana valley in Ethiopia as well as training for local expertsin the framework of development cooperation. Hungaryalso contributed to the establishment of a sanitation centreproviding basic hygienic facilities and clean water in oneof the slum areas of Mombasa in Kenya. Hungarian waterexperts developed the framework for the Herlen river basinin Mongolia and are helping to develop a complex strategyfor the water management of the Eastern Mongolian drainagebasin to mitigate the effects of climate change.Education and capacity building are of critical importancefor the ability to apply new technologies aimed atefficient use of resources. Therefore, Hungary intendsto take a leading role in disseminating knowledge aboutsustainable water use and increase consciousness of waterat all levels. Hungary supports multilateral efforts topromote education on water related issues, particularlysanitation. Hungary is ready to offer capacity buildingtrainings, and share knowledge in the field of sustainablewater resource management.[ 210 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONAssessment of Lebanon’s shared water resourcesand the need for effective cooperationAmin Shaban, Talal Darwich and Mouin Hamze, National Council for Scientific Research, Beirut, LebanonLebanon, a Middle Eastern country with an area of about10,400 km 2 , is known for its plentiful water resources.The precipitation rate averages about 900 mm, thus 15rivers exist and more than 2,000 major springs, in addition toa number of potential groundwater reservoirs. However, thecountry faces several challenges resulting from water stress thatstems from both natural and human driving forces. In additionto climate change, pollution, and over-exploitation, themismanagement of transboundary water resources is the mostsignificant issue. A lack of effective cooperative water managementapproaches at local, regional and even international levels,means that shared water is neglected and uncontrolled.About three quarters of Lebanon’s border is sharedwith neighbouring countries, and thus it has manyshared water resources. Yet no creditable measureshave been reported on cross-border water. There aretwo transboundary rivers between Lebanon and Syriain the north and one river feeding Lake Tebria andthe Jordan River to the south. In addition, the threemajor aquifers of Lebanon extend to neighbouringregions. There is only one water treaty with Syriaon the Orontes River, established in 1994. This hasproved a successful aspect of cooperation. However,the rest of Lebanon’s transboundary water resourcesImage: National Council of Scientific Research (CNRS), LebanonUncontrolled use of transboundary river water along the Al-Kabir River[ 211 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONare still ignored and subjected to exhaustion – particularlythe Al-Kabir River in the north and the El-Wazzani River inthe south. To date, however, there has been no credible studyto assess and allocate the transboundary water resources thatLebanon shares with neighbouring countries. Consequently,geopolitical conflicts frequently exist due to the obscure natureof the hydrological conditions.There follows an assessment of the principal hydrological aspectsof Lebanon’s transboundary water resources, including quantitativemeasures and geospatial delineations. This can be used as first-handinformation to highlight the urgent need for effective cooperation atlocal, regional and international levels upon which bilateral agreementscan be established.Lebanon is characterized by two adjacent mountain ranges whichare separated by the Bekaa plain. The three units trend northnorth-eastto south-south-west. The rock succession of Lebanon iswell-defined by carbonate rocks (mainly limestone) building up thelargest part of the stratigraphic column. 1The existence of elevated mountain ranges, especially thosefacing the Mediterranean, has created a climatic barrier thatreceives cold air masses from the west, resulting in a high precipitationrate which reaches up to 1,500 mm per year. This makesLebanon a water-rich country, once described as ‘the water towerof the Middle East’. It is a unique region in the Middle East wheresnow cover remains for a couple of months on the mountaincrests, occupying about 2,500 km 2 . In addition, there are morethan 2,000 major springs, with discharge exceeding 10 litres persecond, and around 60 major submarine springs issue offshore. 2Lebanon is also well known for its karstic cavities, which constitutea major source of groundwater.Recently, Lebanon became a country under water stress,notably in the context of climatic variability and populationgrowth. There has been an obvious volumetric decrease in theavailable water resources in the last few decades, estimated at anaverage of 40 per cent. 3Even though Lebanon has a small land area (around 10,400 km 2 ),a large part of its water resources is shared with neighbouring countries.Hence, out of the 882 km border perimeter, approximately 559km (63 per cent) is shared with Syria in the north and east; and 98km (11 per cent) with is shared with other countries in the southand partly to the east. The other 225 km faces the MediterraneanSea. In several localities, however, geographical landmarks such asmountains and valleys often coincide with political borders betweenthe three countries. There is an obvious lack of joint implementationsto conserve water resources that extend between these regions,and this in turn results in many aspects of water loss and qualitydeterioration. In addition, the lack of cross-bordercooperation makes it difficult to assess hydrologicalmeasures. This often leads to conflicts at differentlevels, whether between the adjacent inhabitants orbetween governments. There is an urgent need forbilateral agreements to join assessments between theneighbouring regions, in order to reach a comprehensivefigure on water resources and a hydrological regimefor effective water use.There are about 215 international rivers and 300groundwater basins that are shared by two or morecountries. 4 However, transboundary water resourceshave many different aspects and a wide range of scales.Normally, aquifers and rivers are the only hydrologicalcomponents considered as shared water resources.However, other components, such as streams andsprings, are also important and must be included inhydrological investigation.Lebanon’s border, topography and border rocksSource: National Council of Scientific Research (CNRS), LebanonFundamental characterizations of Lebanon’s shared riversRiverAl-KabirEl-AssiEl-WazzaniLength(in Lebanon)60 km65 km75 kmCatchment area Origin(in Lebanon)295 km 2Shared1,900 km 2Lebanon625 km 2 LebanonToMediterraneanSyria, TurkeyPTMajor exploitation65% SyriaSyria, TurkeyPTSource: National Council of Scientific Research (CNRS), Lebanon[ 212 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONTherefore, the aspects of transboundary water must includeperennial and temporary resources of different scales. 5 They can besummarized as follows:• groundwater reservoirs (aquifers) where groundwater is stored inrocks that extend for large areas (several hundred kilometres) andhave considerable thickness exceeding several hundred metres• rivers – as permanent watercourses these usually run alongsloping topography and then transect different countries• springs are usually considered as essential water sources; severalsprings are located near political borders and issue water fromone country to another• streams are temporary watercourses that also transectdifferent regions.Usually, the tools used to identify and assess shared water resourcesinclude topographic and cadastre maps. The combination of thesetwo maps in conjunction with geological and hydrological datacan help adjoining countries to diagnose their shared waters.However, erroneous delineation and readings of these maps cancreate conflict between countries.The assessment of Lebanon’s water resources in this studyfollowed a number of approaches and utilized advanced techniqueseither in computerizing maps or in the analysis of geospatial data.The applied steps can be summarized as follows:• Harmonizing the available maps (topography, geology andcadastre) in digital forms, including the adjacent regionsbetween Lebanon and its neighbouring countries• Joining together the data and information on maps withattributed tables (database) in the geographic informationsystem in order to be able to modify, update and measure therequired information.• Fixing the measures and dimensions of geospatial data forthe shared sources including rivers, streams, geologicalboundaries, location of springs and so on.• Using remotely sensed data, especially in monitoring the extent ofsnow cover. For this purpose, MODIS-Terra satellite images wereanalyzed. In some cases, high-resolution images were processed(such as Ikonos, Aster and Landsat).• Applying filed surveys, whenever applicable, to generate thenames, ownership and other related data on shared waterresources at the border area.The method used for transboundary water resources assessmentPreparingavailable dataData manipulation(in GIS)Applying measures,calculations andcartographyDatacorrectionRemote sensingapplicationRemote sensingapplicationSource: National Council of Scientific Research (CNRS), LebanonComprehensive andcomplete dataFollowing this approach, water resources shared byLebanon with neighbouring regions could be identifiedas follows.Shared groundwater in aquiferous rock formationsbetween Lebanon and the neighbouring regions iscomposed largely of carbonate rocks (92 per cent),basalt and alluvial deposits (8 per cent). About 87 percent of Lebanon’s border is shared with Syria and theother 13 per cent with its southern neighbours. Theserock formations are almost all carbonate rocks withhigh fracture and karstic systems.The major fracture systems (faults) in these rockformations were identified from satellite images. Thus,185 major faults were identified. These faults workas hydrological channels transporting groundwaterbetween Lebanon and adjacent regions.There are three shared rivers between Lebanon itsneighbouring countries, two rivers with Syria and onewith the southern countries. These are the Al-KabirRiver (150 million cubic metres) along the northernborder of Lebanon with Syria, the Orontes (locallycalled El-Assi, 500 million cubic metres) which originatesin Lebanon and extends to Syria to the north andthen to Turkey, and the third is the El-Wazzani (220million cubic metres) which runs from Lebanon downstreamthough the Galilee.The origin of springs in Lebanon is identified, butthe run-off routes are almost unrecognized, notablywhen they run towards the neighbouring regions.These springs are fed mainly from snowmelt. Thesurvey obtained from the topographic maps identified77 major shared springs in Lebanon. However,springs are chaotically utilized by the inhabitants,since the ownerships of these resources is not wellidentified, and there is no common manner of wateruse from these springs. Thus, the shared springs arenot controlled and they are subjected to many pollutionaspects and overexploitation.Streams were not counted in this assessment becausethey do not issue water permanently. However, theyappear as a geopolitical issue when dams are built alongthem and running water becomes restricted only to theupstream country. In the study, only the major sharedstreams were identified among their catchment areas.Like many regions worldwide, Lebanon has recentlygiven great concern to its water resources, whichbecame threatened in the light of the challengingclimatic regime and the increased population size.However, studies in this respect are still too rare tomake a detailed assessment of Lebanese shared waterresources. This study extends to a brief discussion onthe major elements of the Lebanese water resourcesand approaches for assessment and monitoring.However, if such a study is applied in the neighbouringregions, the integration of different data andinformation, as well as cooperation on the regionallevel, will enable a clear figure for each country’s waterquota and the avoidance of future conflicts on waterresources in the Middle East region.[ 213 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONIt is obvious that a considerable number of water resources inLebanon are shared with neighbouring regions. This is attributedmainly to the geomorphic and geologic setting of Lebanon. In addition,most shared water resources originate from the Lebaneseterritory which indicates their availability. However, no specifichydrological measures have been known yet to articulate the currentstatus of these resources. Thus, a detailed assessment is needed toallocate the volumetric measures of shared water resources.Except for one treaty on transboundary water between Lebanonand Syria, however, there is no other convention or treaty forLebanon’s shared water resources. This treaty was initiated in1994 and concerned only the Orontes River. Before 1994, theutilization of the Orontes River was limited to fish culture andsmall-scale irrigation systems from a few wells. 6 However, latelySyria uses 90 per cent of Orontes River water. In addition, Syriaexecuted five dams with total storage capacity of about 735 millioncubic metres per year, and then 120 million cubic metres per yeardrains downstream towards Turkey. The established cooperationbetween the Lebanon and Syria on the Orontes River permitscontrol of the run-off rate between the two countries, as well asallowing the use of the joined aspects of water from this river. Thisincludes water pumping from the river and feeding springs, as wellas uniform groundwater exploitation. The 1994 treaty betweenLebanon and Syria reveals a successful aspect of effective cooperationon transboundary water. Nevertheless, this is not the case forother Lebanese shared water. There remains a clear ignorance onthe Al-Kabir River, which extends along the northern border ofLebanon with Syria. This has resulted in uncontrolled behaviouralong the river watercourse, such as the smuggling, direct waterpumping, sewage outlets into the river and many other aspects ofwater waste-use.This is also the case with south and south-eastern Mediterraneancountries, where the El-Wazzani River, which originates in Lebanon,runs downstream without any volumetric or quality control.Conflicts often exist along this river between Lebanonand Israel, such as in 2002. This is mainly attributedto the geopolitical situation in the region whichprevents the execution of any convention or treaty onthese transboundary water resources. There are somestudies and research projects that focus on these issues.However, although these studies and projects have beenestablished and funded by international entities such asthe United Nations Economic and Social Commissionfor Western Asia and the United Nations DevelopmentProgramme, no attention has yet been paid to them andthe conflict still exists.In the light of the current situation, however, thefollowing potential measures can be proposed toimprove national capacities for better management oftransboundary water resources in Lebanon:• initiating operational mechanisms for enhancingthe management of transboundary water resources• improving capacity building on conflict resolutionand negotiation skills• strengthening coordination and harmonization ofpolicies among various water sectors concerned intransboundary water resources• enhancing governance and partnerships withdonor communities on water projects alongshared water regions• ensuring the ratification of watercourse conventions• enhancing knowledge and information systems oncross-border water resources• developing national interests for a regional sharedvision and benefit sharing• institutional strengthening of regional and nationalmechanisms and institutions to improve themanagement of shared water resources.Image: National Council of Scientific Research (CNRS), LebanonGasoline smuggling along the Al-Kabir River between Lebanon and Syria due to the lack of informal controls[ 214 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONAlternative water resources in agriculture forimproving production and poverty reductionShoaib Ismail, Ian McCann, Shabbir Shahid , Fiona Chandler and Mohamed AmraniInternational Center for Biosaline Agriculture, Dubai, United Arab EmiratesFor many countries, especially in the developing world,agriculture is the engine of growth, and food security andpoverty alleviation are largely dependent on the ruralagricultural economy. Water and land are the most fundamentalresources required for agricultural production and environmentalgoods and services. Management of land and water is criticalin overcoming the development challenges of poverty, food andnutrition insecurity, water scarcity and environmental degradation.So far, land and water management systems have beenable to meet the demands placed on them. However, recent Foodand Agriculture Organization estimates indicate that in order tomeet the projected demand for food in 2050, global agriculturalproduction must be 60 per cent above the level of 2005-2007.Food production accounts for 90 per cent of water use in most ofthe developing countries. Therefore water resources, in both quantityand quality, are a major factor limiting agriculturalsustainability, poverty reduction and economic developmentin many countries. Despite increasingly efficientwater use, the demand for fresh water has continued toclimb as the world’s population and economic activityhave expanded. According to some recent projections,in 2025 two thirds of the world’s population will besuffering moderate to high water stress and about halfof the population will face real constraints in their watersupply. This is especially true in the Middle East andNorth Africa (MENA) region, where almost all conventionalwater resources have already been exploited.At the same time energy, investments and humanresources are required to make the best use of thewater that is available, especially considering populationgrowth and the adverse impacts of projectedCase study: Rhodes grass reduction in Abu Dhabi emirateThe Abu Dhabi Government has set a target of reducingwater consumption in the agricultural sector by 40 per cent.One strategy to meet this target was to minimize the plantingof Rhodes grass which is an excessive water consumer.Nearly 10,500 Rhodes grass farms in the emirate wereirrigated with more than 59 per cent of the 1.5 billion m 3 ofwater that is used for irrigation each year. In most cases,the grass grown was reported to be irrigated with between40,000-50,000 m 3 ha -1 . However, the annual gross waterdemand for Rhodes grass (under modest efficiency) wasestimated to be about 30,000 m 3 ha -1 resulting in waterwastage. Furthermore, Rhodes grass is not very salt-tolerantand many of the farms in the Abu Dhabi emirate (especiallyin the Western region) had become salinized and could notsustain economic productivity.There are many other salt-tolerant forages that couldgrow under higher salinities (>20 dS m -1 , >14,000parts per million) and have better nutrient quality. TheICBA-Abu Dhabi Farmers Service Center project is aninitiative to re-vegetate abandoned saline lands withsalt-tolerant forages as an alternative to Rhodes grass.The project aims to develop demonstration farms wherethe farmers and policymakers will be able to witnesshow appropriate crops and crop management canturn productivity around. The project liaises betweenthe research, extension, end user and implementingagencies. The outcomes are linked to the capacitybuilding of research and extension staff and farmers,both on new and emerging crops and forages for saltaffectedfarms and on the local production of seeds(salt-tolerant forages) for the farmers.The ICBA-Abu Dhabi Farmers Service Center project is helping to re-vegetate abandonedsaline lands with salt-tolerant foragesImage: ICBA[ 215 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONfuture changes in climate in the dry regions. Rainfall (greenwater)is scarce and surface water and groundwater (bluewater) arealready heavily exploited. Rivers are limited to a few countrieswithin the region and the downstream areas, such as the NileDelta in Egypt and the lower Tigris/Euphrates in Iraq, are sufferingfrom increasing salinity and/or reduced flows. Much of thegroundwater in other countries has very limited natural rechargeand is being overused, resulting in declining levels (with increasedpumping energy required to use it) and increased salinity. Part ofthe solution is to explore other water sources, crops with low waterrequirement, higher water productivity and appropriate policies.A total of 2.6 billion km 3 of usable (3,000-16,000 parts permillion) brackish water per year is available to potentially irrigateabout 332,000 ha of land in six of the MENA countries through‘biosaline agriculture’. 1 Substituting saline or wastewater resourcesfor fresh water used in agriculture (for many agricultural commodities)can free the fresh water for other essential sectors to improvehealth, sustainability and poverty reduction.Case study: MAWREDThe water storage variations, 2012-2013: timely data is needed tounderstand resource limits and the impacts of future conditionsGroundwater resources are under increasing pressure in the MENAregion and declining levels in many aquifers highlight the need for carefulfuture management. Given the growing need for water in many economicsectors, decision makers need to understand current resource limitsand the impacts of future conditions as they develop policies balancingdemands. The provision of timely data is an important input into thisprocess, but in many MENA countries such information is limited.The MAWRED (Modeling and Monitoring Agriculture and Water ResourcesDevelopment) programme, through dynamic modelling and space-basedobservations, is developing new country-level (Tunisia, Iraq and Yemen)and regional data sets to support evidence-based policy development anddecision-making in the MENA region. This programme is funded by theUnited States Agency for International Development and is in partnershipwith the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Data developmentfalls under four main groups:• Climate variability – seasonal forecasting (3-6 months) anddynamically downscaled long-term (20 year periods over 100 years)climate change• Water resources – current and future ground and soil water andevapotranspiration balance• Agriculture – current land cover, crop group and irrigation maps; keycrop yield estimates under current and future climatic conditions;irrigation use water balances• Drought monitoring – estimates of hydrological and agricultural drought.Image: ICBAThe main challenge of using saline and brackishwater in agricultural production is to develop sustainableand economical production systems for marginalareas through:• selecting appropriate plant species• identifying saline and brackish water resources• identifying available land resources for theapplication of biosaline agriculture• developing appropriate soil salinity managementpractices• developing irrigation and leaching practices that canmaintain root-zone salinity at acceptable levels• evaluating applicable production systems• monitoring livestock production (in the case offorage production systems).Managing land and water resources effectively andefficiently requires increasing the diversity of cropsproduced. Many conventional crops are generally notsalt-tolerant compared with forages, and most forageproduction systems consume large amounts of freshwater per unit of dry matter produced. Moreover,forage production is often insufficient to meet thedemands of an increasing livestock population, whichleads to increasing pressure on natural rangelandresources and contributes to land degradation anddesertification. By using crops that not only toleratebut thrive in saline conditions and produce economicyields, the whole landscape can be changed for poorfarmers, leading to improved food security and povertyalleviation. Therefore the development of productionsystems that use saline water in salt-affected environmentsaddresses several important economic andenvironmental constraints.Cooperation at local, national, regional and internationallevels is crucial in managing the often competinginterests between different users of water and land.However, cooperation and integration between localknowledge, advances in science (research) and policies(laws and budgets) is still fragmented, especially in underdevelopedcountries. The linkages between the technicalexperts, local stakeholders and decision makers are keyfactors for successful decision-making related to water.Increased levels of cooperation have led to increaseddemands for information on which to make sounddecisions. It is important to generate data, modellingand tools, including geographic informationsystem technology and remote sensing, in orderto obtain sound characterization and for land andwater management planning. Unfortunately, most ofthe international databases have been developed forgood quality water and arable lands, and hence nocomprehensive and reliable information is availablefor marginal environments.In developing countries many organizations havewater resources data, but it is often fragmented andlocated in the files and on the shelves of separateministries, departments, institutions, libraries anduniversities. The lack of centralized basic information[ 216 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONand data is one of challenges facing water resources management.Under such conditions it is essential to find out what dataalready exists, who owns it and how is it stored, and to transformthis into a usable form for decision-making. Integrating soil andwater databases can allow users to view soil and water informationtogether. For example, someone interested in identifyingareas best suited for irrigated agriculture can select the data layershowing the distribution of groundwater quality in the same area.When such databases are linked with international databases orwith those of other countries that face similar challenges andhave relevant knowledge, their usefulness can be increased. Agood example is the Modeling and Monitoring Agriculture andWater Resources Development (MAWRED) programme at theInternational Center for Biosaline Agriculture (ICBA), 2 whichprovides data across national boundaries and provides downscalingto local levels.In the least developed countries where marginal lands andwater resources are under pressure and agricultural practicesare non-sustainable, there is a strong need to develop, review orrevise soil, water and agricultural policies based on the food andwater demands of an increasing population and the challenges ofclimate change. Without good policies across an agroecologicalregion that may encompass multiple countries and productionsystems, it is unlikely that sustainable progress can be made.Furthermore, even where clear policies do exist, when it comesto marginal water, these are mostly limited to general standardguidelines, which are related to heavy metals and pathogens butnot to salts or other minerals.Water is a shared resource. In order to ensure a future where weall have access to water and sanitation it is essential that we cooperate.And while it often is the responsibility of government to regulateland and water use, everyone – including farmers and farming businesses– has a role to play in managing and using water responsiblyand supporting the public sector.Many resource-poor farmers are not able to continue profitableagriculture with low to intermediate levels of inputs and lack ofknowledge. Ameliorative measures require new crops and managementwith new skills and expertise to make it sustainable andprofitable. The necessary know-how originates from the nationaland international research and development centres, and has tomove from the research organizations to the relevant ministries andextension services. Unfortunately, in many countries and regions,this appears to be the weakest link and new and innovative technologiesdo not reach the end users so they can implement appropriatemeasures at the right time.Although scientific research has produced large amounts ofinformation on water and land management, the linkages betweenresearch and extension are usually weak in most developingcountries. As a consequence, research results are often not basedon extension recommendations, and do not reflect the needs offarmers. New helpful, appropriate and innovative technologiesmust reach farmers soon after release. Partnerships and cooperationwith private industry can be very useful. For example, thewidespread availability of mobile telephones, even in poor communities,provides an opportunity to deliver information and tools.Such applications are generally developed by the private sectorwith the expectation that some income can be made. Partneringsuch expertise with technical know-how from extension andresearch and with farmers’ knowledge and participation can bepowerful and result in income generation for bothproviders and customers within a community. As acase in point, on-farm research in water productivitycan be conducted using instrumentation or marketinformation that provides data over the Internet, andthis data can be processed and delivered to farmersrapidly in a way that is understandable and useful.Cooperation at many levels is required for success,but the potential for real and demonstrated incomeincreases will provide the incentive and interest.Case study: Combating salinity throughnational strategyImage: ICBAOman’s national salinity strategy recommendsalternative ways to improve water use and monitoring,soil management and agricultural productionThe national strategy to combat salinity and protect waterresources from pollution and salinity in Oman was launchedon 2 October 2012 by Sheikh Fadl bin MohammedAl Harthy, Secretary-General of the Oman Council ofMinisters. ICBA developed the strategy over a rigorous twoyearprocess that included five technical teams workingon different aspects: water resources and modelling,agricultural status and salinity impact, socioeconomicassessment, governance, legal/regulatory frameworks andpolicies, and capacity development. The process includedcontinuous consultation with key ministries, governmentagencies and local and international specialists.The study indicated that excessive water use is theprime cause of salinization of agricultural soils. In manyareas water demand exceeded supply, resulting in theintrusion of saline water into the aquifers. Even when thegroundwater was considered good quality, poor on-farmmanagement complicated the problems by causingsalinization of the soil. The study recommends alternativestrategies to improve water use and monitoring, soilmanagement and agricultural production in the differenttypes of soil and water conditions; strategic options toreduce seawater intrusion; and tactics (in the short,medium and long term) to implement solutions across theSultanate of Oman.[ 217 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONManaging water, sustainability and povertyreduction through collective community actionSuhas P. Wani, K. H. Anantha and William D. Dar, International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid TropicsAccess to and management of land and water resources needto improve significantly to ensure sustainable and inclusivedevelopment. With increasing demand for food productionto meet the needs of the growing population, increasing incomesand changing food habits, water scarcity will intensify. Estimatesindicate that present food production requires some 7,000 km 3 /year of consumptive fresh water. Of this, 1,800 km 3 /year originatesfrom bluewater (run-off) use in irrigation and the remaining5,200 km 3 /year from direct greenwater (rainwater as soil moisture)use in rain-fed agriculture.Two hot-spot regions of the world emerge in terms of water needsfor food and livelihoods: Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and Asia. For SSAindications suggest a tripling of agricultural water demand by 2025,and an almost five-fold increase by 2050.1 By 2025, an estimated1.8 billion people will live in countries or regions with absolutewater scarcity, with almost half of the world living in conditions ofwater stress. Nearly 1.2 billion people across the world live in areasof physical water scarcity, while another 1.6 billion face what canbe called economic water shortage. The situation is only expectedto worsen as population growth, climate change, investment andmanagement shortfalls restrict the amount of water available topeople. Land degradation and moisture stress have largely resultedin low crop yields, as the current farmers’ yields are two to five timeslower than achievable crop yields in Asia and Africa.2 At the sametime climate change brings additional risks and further unpredictabilityof returns for farmers. This calls for improved governanceof land and water resources and a closer integration of policies,combined with increased and more strategic investment targetingfood security and poverty alleviation.3Need for a holistic approachIn this regard, a major concern is to rehabilitate existing vast tractsof degraded land and manage water resources efficiently to ensurelivelihood support for rural populations in these regions. Consideringthe existing mismatch between resource availability and management,the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics(ICRISAT) and its partners have demonstrated several innovativeup-scalable options to effectively tackle the problem at micro-level.The integrated watershed management approach aims at applying aholistic approach to water management that acknowledges the vitalrole played by both greenwater and bluewater flows in sustaining directand indirect ecological functions and services benefiting humans. 4Both greenwater and bluewater are generated in the landscape, andintegrated water resource management is the key for sustainabledevelopment and management of water at small catchment scale,which is recommended for enhancing the efficiency ofwater in rain-fed areas. 5 Indications are that greenwaterdominates food production, as consumptive use of greenwateris four times larger than that of bluewater. Fieldmeasurements of rain-fed grain yields and actual greenwaterflows indicated that by doubling yields from 1 to2 t ha -1 in semi-arid tropical agroecosystems, greenwaterproductivity may improve from approximately 3,500 m 3t -1 to less than 2,000 m 3 t -1 . Further, the conventionalsectoral approach to water management produced lowwater use efficiencies resulting in increased demand forwater to produce food. Therefore, there is a need for aholistic approach based on converging all the necessaryaspects of natural resource conservation, their efficientuse, production functions through enabling policies andmuch-needed investment in fragile areas. This calls fora community-based approach involving stakeholders asdecision makers.Innovative model for watershed managementICRISAT has developed and adopted a consortiummodel of watershed management. This espouses theprinciples of collective action, convergence, cooperationand capacity building with technical backstoppingby a consortium of institutions comprising nationalagricultural research systems, development agencieslike government line departments, and non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs) to address the issues ofequity, efficiency, economics and environment. 6 Thenew integrated community watershed model providestechnological options for the management of run-off,water harvesting, in-situ conservation of rainwater forgroundwater recharging and supplemental irrigation,appropriate nutrient and soil management practices,waterway systems, crop production technology, andappropriate farming systems with income-generatingmicro-enterprises for improving livelihoods whileprotecting the environment. The current model ofwatershed management adopted by ICRISAT and itspartners involves environment-friendly options and theuse of new science tools which, along with the conceptof the consortium approach, emphasise empoweringfarmers through capacity building and adopt a conceptof convergence in every activity in the watershed. 7To provide the necessary knowledge to farmers, anICRISAT-led consortium provided technical backstopping[ 218 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: ICRISATImage: ICRISATEfficient management of water resources is needed to ensure livelihood supportA drain diversion into a wellThe scaling-up of these innovations has been attemptedin countries like India, Vietnam, Thailand and China.In India, the new model has been scaled up through aDepartment for International Development-supportedAndhra Pradesh Rural Livelihood Project in the stateof Andhra Pradesh. This approach puts the peopleliving in the watershed at the centre of developmentand involves not only soil and water conservation, butalso the efficient and sustainable use of resources toimprove the livelihoods of people including womenand the landless. In this programme, the scaling-upapproach has been extended to 50 watersheds (10nucleus and 40 satellite) in three districts of AndhraPradesh. With support from the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust ithas been extended to nine districts of Madhya Pradeshand seven districts in Rajasthan, India. Further, theWorld Bank-assisted Sujala watersheds and Adarshawatershed, Kothapally, have served as benchmark ornucleus watersheds and demonstrated the benefits ofintegrated watershed management. The technologyhas been adopted in the watersheds of neighbouringvillages and other areas by farmers with little technicalsupport from the consortium. This approach wasalso implemented in China, Thailand and Vietnam withsupport from the Asian Development Bank. The Bureauof Agricultural Research in the Philippines is adopting asimilar approach for scaling-out the benefits of productivityenhancement in watersheds.The recent comprehensive assessment of watershedprogrammes in India 9 led by ICRISAT and its partnershas clearly shown the potential of these programmesin the country, and the new Common guidelines forwatershed management 10 have adopted this approachfor addressing natural resource management alongwith improving livelihoods. Based on Sujala watershedexperiences, ICRISAT and the GoK have taken a knowltothe community. Soil health assessment, stress-tolerant high yieldingcultivars, water analysis and so on were used as an entry point for buildinga rapport with the community. Improved rainwater managementand harvesting resulted in increased efficiency in greenwater use as wellas augmenting water resources (ground and surface water) throughlow-cost water harvesting structures.Knowledge-sharing systemIn the watershed, knowledge-based entry point activities haveenhanced the farmers’ capacity and improved their participationin programme activities. Collective action in soil sampling, varietalselection and water management has ensured the sustainability ofthe system in the region. For example, the diagnostic farmers’ participatorysoil health assessment in the watershed revealed widespreaddeficiencies of zinc, boron and sulphur in farmers’ fields which wereholding back the potential of rain-fed agriculture in the region. 8Through the participatory approach nearly 100,000 soil sampleswere collected across 30 districts of Karnataka in India under theBhoochetana initiative, and taluk-wise and crop-wise recommendationswere developed based on the soil analysis for micro and macronutrients. This approach resulted in increased crop yields of 20-66per cent over farmers’ management, and ensured an increased agriculturalgrowth rate for the state. Similarly, under a Governmentof Karnataka (GoK) Sujala-ICRISAT initiative, farmers selectedimproved varieties of ragi (finger millet) and groundnut along withimproved hybrids of maize, sunflower and soybean through participatoryvarietal evaluation, and produced increased yields over theirvarieties. The economic benefits of improved management practicesin crops varied from Rs6,300 ha -1 in the case of finger millet toRs21,000 ha -1 in the case of sunflowers.Scaling-up processThe innovative integrated watershed management model hasdemonstrated that with proper management of natural resources thesystem’s productivity can be enhanced and poverty can be reducedwithout causing further degradation of the natural resource base.[ 219 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONedge-based approach to bridging yield gaps with a mission-modeinitiative, forming a consortium and a network for stakeholders toshare their knowledge about the weather, soil health and improvedmanagement practices across all 30 districts in the state. Theoverwhelming impact has strengthened the partnership betweenICRISAT and the GoK, and eight major Consultative Group onInternational Agricultural Research (CGIAR) centres have beeninvited, along with AVRDC (the World Vegetable Center), to worktowards improving rural livelihood systems in four benchmarkdistricts representing different agroecological zones in the state.Up-scaling the benefits of integrated watershed managementnecessitates an articulated strategy based on the main pillar ofcapacity building of all stakeholders, including farmers, researchers,development workers, policymakers and development investors.New scientific tools such as remote sensing, geographical informationsystems and crop simulation modelling for the analysis oflong-term potential productivity, need to be used as the planningtools. These tools provide the capabilities for extrapolating andimplementing the technologies to other larger watersheds.The ICRISAT consortium focused on training farmers, personnelfrom development agencies and NGOs through demonstrations ofdifferent technologies on benchmark watersheds, and acts as a mentorfor technology backstopping. The farmers’ community, throughvillage institutions, took responsibility for all activities of implementationand monitoring. Government and non-governmental agenciescatalyzed the process. The important aspect while evaluating andscaling-out this approach is that the relevant government line departmentsmust be included in the consortium along with other partners.The role of policymakers and development investors is critical, andsensitization of these stakeholders played a major role inscaling-out the benefits in Asia.Impacts and outcomesAn innovative integrated watershed management modeldeveloped by ICRISAT and its partners produced a widerange of impacts. Close monitoring of groundwaterresources in different watersheds in India confirmedthat water harvesting structures sustained good groundwateryield even after the rainy season. For instance, inthe Lalatora watershed in Madhya Pradesh, the groundwaterlevel in the treated area registered an averagerise of 7.3 metres; at Bundi watershed in Rajasthan a5.7 metre increase was observed, and at the Adarshawatershed, Kothapally in Andhra Pradesh, a 4.2 metrerise in groundwater was recorded. In Adarsha watershed,a study showed that nearly 60 per cent of therun-off water was harvested through agriculturalwater management interventions which also rechargedshallow aquifers. Water harvesting structures (WHS)resulted in a total 6 metre rise in the water table duringthe monsoon. At the field scale, WHS recharged openwells at a 200 to 400 metre spatial scale. 11 The variousWHS resulted in an average contribution of seasonalrainfall to groundwater during the normal rainfall yearof 27-34 per cent in Rajasamadhiyala and Shekta watersheds.12 In the Adarsha watershed, due to additionalgroundwater recharge, a total of 200 ha were irrigatedin the kharif (autumn) season and 100 ha in the rabiMean annual groundwater levels in wells as influenced by the water harvesting structures at Kothapally and Bundi watershedsAdrasha watershed, Andhra PradeshBundi watershed, Rajasthan0150001000Waterlevel in well (m)6121000500Rainfall (mm)Waterlevel in well (m)612500Rainfall (mm)182000 2003 2006 20090182002 2004 20060RainfallNear check damAway from check damSource: Wani et al., 2010[ 220 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATION(spring) season, mostly to vegetables and flowers. Overall, in the65 community watersheds, implementing best-bet practices withbetter water management resulted in significant yield advantages insorghum (35-270 per cent), maize (30-174 per cent), pearl millet(72-242 per cent), groundnut (28-179 per cent), sole pigeonpea(97-204 per cent), and intercropped pigeonpea (40-110 per cent).Integrated watershed management in India, primarily throughwater conservation and management compounded with variousin-situ and ex-situ interventions and improved practices, haveshown a significant increase in productivity, cropping intensityand income while controlling degradation of natural resources. Theincrease in cropping intensity, benefit-to-cost ratio and per capitaincome ranged between 30-55 per cent, 45-88 per cent and 19-78per cent respectively in different community watersheds after theimplementation of watershed interventions over the baseline period.In all these watersheds, the key driver for remarkable change is anincreasing quantity of greenwater and bluewater resources in theform of soil moisture through groundwater recharge initiatives suchas ex-situ and in-situ interventions. These interventions have builtresilience during drought years. As evident from the data at Adarshawatershed in Andhra Pradesh, the share of agricultural income tototal family income remained the same in the 2002 drought year,whereas non-watershed villages experienced a drastic reductionin agricultural income from 44 per cent to 12 per cent of familyincome. Families in these villages had to migrate to supplementtheir livelihoods, whereas in Kothapally, farmers could manage theirlivelihoods in the village itself.The participatory collective action approach adopted for bridgingthe yield gaps in the state of Karnataka has demonstrated theGroundwater availability and recharge during different rainfall andmanagement conditions in Adarsha watershed, Andhra PradeshGW availability at end of the monsoon (mm)1501209060300AWM NIDry year(following a wet year)GW recharge during monsoonSource: Garg and Wani, 2012AWM NIDry year(following a dry year)AWMNINormal year(following a wet year)AWMNINormal year(following a dry year)GW availability at beginning of monsoonvast potential of dryland agriculture for increasing thecrop yields and incomes of millions of small farmers.The unique mechanism of scaling-up with comprehensiveplanning, review and monitoring along with newinstitutions like Farm Facilitators, Raitha SamparkaKendras and supporting policies enabled the consortiumto cover 3.73 million hectares of rain-fed areain the state. Under the Bhoochetana programme,soil-test-based nutrient management interventionsalong with improved seeds, seed treatments and useof biofertilizers resulted in 35-66 per cent increasesin yield levels of dryland crops during the 2009 rainyseason in different districts. During the 2011 rainyseason with an unfavourable rainfall situation, theprogramme resulted in increases of 21-66 per centin major crop yields and 23-42 per cent in oilseedsover farmers’ practice. For the GoK, this translatedto an annual agricultural growth rate of 5.9 per centduring 2009/10, and 11.6 per cent during 2010/11.During 2011, 3 million hectares were covered in therainy season and economic returns were to the tuneof US$130 million. In spite of an unfavourable rainfallsituation in the state, farmers harvested increasedcrop yields with improved management practices,contributing to the economy of the state. This hasdemonstrated the power of science-led interventionsto achieve sustainability in the management of naturalresources for food security and poverty reduction infragile areas.Achieving food security and resilienceWater scarcity and land degradation are the mainconstraints to realizing higher productivity and improvingrural livelihoods in the semi-arid regions. Theintegrated community watershed management approachis a well tested strategy to address the issues of waterand soil degradation along with equity, efficiency andenvironment. Scarcity of water and knowledge sharingthrough the participatory monitoring of increasedgroundwater made farmers more receptive towardsefficient water use technologies such as drips and sprinklers,and enabled them to take appropriate decisionsabout suitable crops and areas to be planted. The newcommon guidelines have provided a framework to bringpeople to centre stage in taking decisions to improveproductivity and livelihoods through sustainable useof natural resources. Within the watersheds, stratifiedsoil sampling and soil-test-based nutrient managementprovides economic solutions to address soil degradation.Model watersheds and Bhoochetana in India havedemonstrated the role of a science-led approach inchanging farm-based livelihoods. However, policies andinstitutional mechanisms played a greater role in operationalizingthe strategy. To achieve the overall goal offood security and resilience in the semi-arid regions,we need to promote the adoption of science-led technologiesthrough appropriate institutional and policysupport, increased awareness and capacity building atdifferent levels.[ 221 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONA blueprint for sustainable groundwatermanagement in Balochistan, PakistanShahbaz Mushtaq, Kathryn Reardon-Smith and Roger Stone, Australian Centre for Sustainable Catchments,University of Southern Queensland, Australia; and Syed Mohammad Khair, BalochistanUniversity of Information, Technology, Engineering and Management Sciences, Quetta, PakistanThe challenge for groundwater-dependent countries is toensure that the benefits derived from groundwater resourcescontinue into the future. This requires a policy shift fromgroundwater development to long-term groundwater management.There follows a brief historical overview of groundwater developmentin Balochistan, Pakistan and a proposed blueprint for animproved groundwater management system in the region.Pakistan has fertile alluvial floodplains but low and highly variablerainfall, and is among the most groundwater-dependent countries.Groundwater development is typically connected with the developmentof tube well (groundwater bore) irrigation systems, which have contributedenormously to increased food production, poverty reduction andimproved sanitary conditions in recent decades. 1 Similar trends areevident across south Asia, where rapid increases in numbers of tubewells have driven significant growth in the agriculture sector. 2While groundwater polices in Pakistan have been highly successfulin enabling increased agricultural production and prosperity, they havealso resulted in massive groundwater drawdown. 3 A range of factorshave contributed to groundwater resource decline, including insufficientlegislation, poor planning and implementation, poor droughtmanagement, lack of institutional capacity and scientific knowledge,lack of groundwater entitlements, and a governmentsubsidy for energy. 4 The historical record of policy implementationin Pakistan, particularly in Balochistan, isextremely poor. Prolonged political instability and lack ofthe required political will further aggravate the situation. 5The management of groundwater is complex due tothe common-pool nature of the resource. 6 Furthermore,lack of knowledge about groundwater biophysicalsystems, poor understanding of the concept of sustainableyield, and a lack of monitoring infrastructure (whichseldom exists in Pakistan) makes it hard to develop andimplement effective groundwater allocation and licensingplans. The present circumstances need a solution.Groundwater development and governancein BalochistanBalochistan is one of four provinces of Pakistan andthe biggest in terms of area (347,190 km 2 ). UplandBalochistan is classified as arid in terms of rainfall,receiving an average rainfall of 200-250 mm annually.The region is renowned for producing a rangeof high-value crops including fruits and vegetables.Image: Syed Mohammad KhairTube well irrigation in Balochistan: (left) a newly installed tube well in a hilly area to irrigate downhill fields, and (right) a vineyard irrigated by traditional tube well[ 222 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONThese are grown under irrigation with most of the agriculturalwater (over 50 per cent and increasing) obtained from groundwaterresources.In the absence of reliable surface-water resources, theGovernment’s groundwater polices aimed to provide an alternativeresource for irrigation to boost agriculture production– thus reducing poverty – and provide water for domesticpurposes. The philosophy of policymakers was to provide thefarmers with a more reliable water source for irrigation and toreplace the traditional karezes (manmade sub-surface horizontaltunnels and galleries) 7 and natural springs which flowedall year round and were seen as causing water wastage. 8 Theelectrification of many rural areas of the province, along withimproved communication networks and promising returns forfruits and vegetables, contributed to strong growth in tube welland dug well irrigation. A government subsidy on electricity usefor tube wells, in place since the 1980s, further expanded tubewell irrigation and improved rural income; however, this hashad an adverse impact on water tables. 9 Without any restrictionor mechanism for allocating groundwater rights and regulatinggroundwater use or access to the electricity subsidy, irrigatorshave extracted as much as they wanted without considering thedetrimental effects on others. 10Until the early-to-mid twentieth century, karezes and springs werethe major source of irrigation (60 per cent) in the upland areas ofthe province. 11 Because of the shallow water table (7-10 metres),animal-driven water-lifting devices such as the Persian wheelwere used to access and pump water. However, in the early 1970s,following electrification in some rural areas, tube wells began to beinstalled in parts of the province. This period saw animal-drivenand diesel pumps being replaced by electric pumps on existing opensurface wells. As a result, farmers were able to convert more area toirrigation, leading to a substantial increase in cropping area. Therewas also a shift from subsistence to more commercialized croppingpatterns. High-value crops such as such as apple, apricot and cherryreplaced low-value crops such as wheat.Between 1980 and 1990, the Government initiateda number of major groundwater developmentprojects with the assistance of donor agencies suchas the Kuwait Fund, the Asian Development Bankand the World Bank. These aid projects providedadditional strong incentives to further increase thenumber of tube wells and groundwater extraction,to meet increasing demand. From 1990 to 2000, theincrease in tube wells continued as a result of ruralelectrification and subsidized power supply to electrictube wells. The electricity subsidy initially requiredtube well owners to pay around 50 per cent of thebill; however, during the late 1990s, the subsidy wasincreased to 90 per cent in response to demands fromfarmers in the province. This fuelled further increasesin water abstraction. The production of high waterdemandinghorticulture crops continued to expand inline with the increasing numbers of tube wells, resultingin overexploitation of groundwater resources andgroundwater aquifer overdraft.Since 2000, drought (1998-2004) and overdraft ofsome aquifers has caused the failure of large numbersof tube wells, with many farmers dispossessed of theirsource of irrigation and hence their livelihoods. Inaddition, the discharge flow of existing tube wellsin many areas has decreased due to the continuousdecline in water tables. Drought rehabilitationprogrammes were initiated by the Government and theinstallation of replacement tube wells, both privatelyand under the drought rehabilitation programme, hascontinued along with the subsidy on electricity.The historical record suggests poor policy developmentand implementation owing to a lack ofinstitutional capacity and scientific knowledge,prolonged political instability in the country and alack of political will. Furthermore, legislation pertain-Groundwater governance, tube well development projects and policies timeline40,00090% subsidyon electricity billsDroughtrehabilitationprogrammesElectricity supplyreduced by 50%Tubewell numbers30,00020,00010,0000Rural electrificationGroundwater InvestigationSubsidized powerInterest free loansfor pumpingRural electrificationintensified,Flat rateon power billsNissai groundwater development project I(ADB) and MPA funded schemes (GoB)SubsidizedtubewellsPrivate drillingfacility intensifiedBan on new tubewell installationin Quetta sub-basinNissai groundwater development project II (ADB)(ADB) other projectsLasbela plain groundwater development projectGovernment of Pakistan (MNA), and (Senator) fundDroughtrehabilitationprogrammes19711972197319741975197619771978197919801981198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008Source: Khair (2013)[ 223 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONThe five fundamental elements of the proposed blueprint forsustainable groundwater management in Balochistan, PakistanInstitutionalreform & improvedgovernanceSupply sidegroundwatermanagementExternalenvironmentDemand sidegroundwatermanagementEffectivecoordination& cooperationCommunityacceptance& adoptionPolitical stability& political willing to the governance and sustainable management of groundwateris largely inadequate. In addition, a key challenge for integratedgroundwater planning is sectoral division, with the traditionallyvertical, compartmentalized structures of government tending tolimit information flows among agencies, thereby impeding coordinatedaction. Integrated water resource management (IWRM)also needs to be conducted at a range of spatial scales. Withoutcoordination and collaboration, there is a real danger of losingeffectiveness and efficiency. 12Blueprint for sustainable groundwater managementThe proposed blueprint for groundwater management is based onfive fundamental elements:• improved governance and effectiveness of institutions• demand-side groundwater management• supply-side groundwater management options• social adoption by the community• effective coordination and cooperation.Improved governance and effectiveness of institutions includesincreased focus on strengthening and enforcing groundwater laws,including establishing clear and tradable property rights for water;better quantification of groundwater yield followed by appropriategroundwater licensing and enforcement to prevent over-extraction ofgroundwater; establishing appropriate systems for resource monitoringon a regular basis at the basin and sub-basin levels; and rigorous collaborationbetween various departments (such as the Irrigation Department,the Agricultural Department, the Balochistan Development Authority,the Public Health Engineering Department and the Water and PowerDevelopment Authority) to improve decision-making.Demand-side groundwater management should include a rationalpricing system for efficient water use; replacement of water demandingcrops with water-use efficient crops; and the adoption of modernwater-saving irrigation technologies and practice.Supply-side groundwater management options should includerainwater harvesting and surface-water use for increasing groundwaterrecharge; promoting conjunctive water use wherepossible; and groundwater markets with suitable institutionalmechanisms to augment water supply.Social adoption by the community includes providinga sense of ownership of the regional groundwaterresources and developing basin-wide groundwater users’associations with responsibilities to conserve, protect,develop and manage groundwater resources to increasecommunity welfare. It entails the strengthening ofcoordination among various stakeholders (includinggovernment departments), developing a communityvision of groundwater management through betterinformation, knowledge-sharing and communicationsfor social adoption and efficient water use. Social normsand rules must be developed (some already exist) toprevent any illegal water extraction for agriculture andother purposes.Development of sustainable groundwater plans willrequire the cooperation and coordination of a numberof government agencies and key stakeholder groups.The blueprint for sustainable groundwater managementwould require the community to provide significantinput into the management planning process, particularlyadvising on appropriate uses and values of the localgroundwater systems. In order to enhance cooperationand coordination, as suggested by Pahl-Wostl andKranz, 13 some degree of decentralization combined witheffective vertical integration of different levels of government(provincial and local) that share responsibility for aresource, and horizontal integration within governmentlevels, would be required.Social adoption and changing groundwater cultures offerconsiderable potential to internalize externalities (factorswhich received inadequate attention in previous IWRMplans) and are key elements of this blueprint for sustainablegroundwater management in Balochistan. However,it is worth noting that without firm political commitmentand effective coordination of different elements ofthe blueprint, it would be extremely difficult to achievesustainable management of groundwater resources.Moving from development to managementGroundwater is the subject of growing socialconcern around the globe, and this is especially soin Pakistan. While they are successful in enhancingagricultural production, groundwater policies inPakistan and, most particularly, in the province ofBalochistan are not well designed to handle groundwatersustainability issues. They are based on alack of geophysical knowledge and are also poorlyimplemented due to poor governance, inadequateinstitutional arrangements and lack of politicaldetermination. With groundwater systems seriouslydegrading in the region, there is a critical need fora shift from groundwater development policies togroundwater management policies accompanied bysound hydrological planning. The five fundamentalcomponents proposed above should be part of anyIWRM approach proposed and developed in Pakistan.[ 224 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONWater cooperation – the Brazilian casePaulo Augusto Cunha Libânio, Water Resources Specialist, National Water Agency, BrazilFrom the last decades of the twentieth century onward,there has been increasing concern about the impact ofdemographic change and economic growth on globalwater availability. Uncertain scenarios for climate change onlyadd to existing concerns over water distribution in time andspace, requiring robust strategies at national and internationallevels aimed at curbing water scarcity and water shortages.In the face of such challenges, water cooperation is of paramountimportance to sustainable development. It includes a series of issues,from transferring of water technology to water financing. Sharingexperiences is also a crucial aspect of water cooperation, as there areno universal recipes for success in water governance and no shortcutsto promote effective water management other than gaining knowledgefrom hard-learned lessons. Above all, sharing experiences helps usto rethink basic questions such as the role of political institutions indeveloping water policies and that of civil society in bringing aboutgreater public engagement in water governing processes.In this sense, the Brazilian experience with democratic water governancemechanisms is an interesting case. Brazil is a federal republicmade up of subnational administrative units (a federal district, 26states and 5,565 municipalities) that are politically autonomousbut interdependent. In addition, Brazil is a country of continentaldimensions – approximately 8.5 million km 2 – almost equivalent toMeeting of the São Francisco River Basin CommitteeImage: Raylton Alves courtesy of the National Water AgencyEurope, with huge water basins including large aquifersand extensive streams of water cross-cutting and borderingdifferent self-governing states.To some extent, the challenges for securing watergovernance within the Brazilian federation may becompared to those faced by neighbouring countrieswhen dealing with transboundary waters. The mainissues facing Brazil can be addressed from two differentperspectives. Firstly, that of the cooperative effortsbuilt on relationships between representatives of stateand non-state actors, particularly in water forums withboard-like structures and deliberative powers such aswater councils (at national and state levels) and riverbasin committees (at regional level). And secondly, thatof the relationship between state actors across differentbranches of government and through different levels ofBrazil’s federal system such as federal, state and municipalgovernments.Participatory and decentralized water managementBrazil’s water policy of 1997 determined that watermanagement should guarantee the multiple uses ofwater resources, while being decentralized and participatory.It involves public authorities, water users andcivil society in the decision-making process. These legalprovisions require a governance system capable of coordinatingthe actions of all social actors involved – fromthe small landowner to big water industry and fromvoluntary environmental groups to private entrepreneurs,each with their own convictions and expectationsabout how water resources should be allocated.To decide when, for whom, how much and inwhich way it is possible to allocate water resources,one cannot rely only on technical criteria. Definingobjectives and priorities for water use is primarily apolitical process. Hence, according to the democraticvalues enshrined in the Brazilian Constitution of 1988and the new principles and guidelines established bythe water reforms of the 1990s, this process couldno longer be confined to the limits of technocracy.It could neither be submitted to the administrativepowers held by public offices, nor conditioned to theorganized interests vested in elected officials.Based on that principle, Brazilian policymakerscreated an institutional mechanism by which all socialactors – government, private and voluntary sectorsalike – have the opportunity to decide major questionsthrough direct democracy. Based on the French water[ 225 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONmanagement model, board-like structures with tripartite composition– public authorities, water users and civil society – werestructured not only as a platform for public debate but, above all, aspermanent water forums endowed with deliberative powers to steerthe implementation of planning and economic instruments.Over the past 25 years, almost 200 river basin committees have beenestablished throughout the country covering an area of more than 2.1million km 2 , almost a quarter of Brazil’s territory. During that sameperiod, water councils with a composition similar to that of river basincommittees have been established in all states and at the federal level.These forums function as ‘water parliaments’ and today they constitutethe main political arena for integrating water-related policy sectors.An estimated 9,800 people are currently involved with the politicalactivities carried out in water councils and river basin committees, ofwhom more than 3,000 are representatives of organizations in civilsociety including non-government organizations, professional associationsand centres of higher education and research.Despite the operational difficulties of running a decentralizedsystem in such a vast territory, including high transaction costsand acute asymmetries of knowledge and organization amongstakeholders, the benefits of transition from centralized, state-ledpolicymaking to the current model are undeniable. For the firsttime non-state actors, particularly small community organizations,have had an opportunity to influence high-level political processes.They can have their say in matters of public and private investmentsin water infrastructure, the definition of environmental standardsfor protection of surface and groundwater, and allocation of waterresources among different sectors of the economy.Besides providing institutional channels for citizen participationin the decision-making process, these water councils and river basincommittees also created an enabling environment for collaborativewater governance. New forms of intersectoral and inter-institutionalpartnerships have been developed around distinct forms of watercooperation: public-public, private-private and public-private.One example is the River Basin Clean-Up Program (PRODES)that offers output-based aid (OBA) for sanitation services, bindingpublic funding of sanitary infrastructure with decisions on waterpollution control made collectively by members of these waterforums. Another example is the Water Producer Program whichoffers technical and financial support for payment for environmentalservices (PES) initiatives, many of them carried out at the watershedlevel. The existence of an operative river basin committee is a keyfactor for success in PES schemes, as they contribute to bringingpotential buyers and sellers together and facilitate the crafting ofmulti-stakeholder agreements. Once the institutional arrangementsare in place, it is possible to overcome often-observed conflicts thatusually stem from the use of coercive instruments under commandand-controlstrategies.Integrated water managementBoth the division of inland waters between federal and statejurisdictions and the establishment of a national system of watermanagement as set out in the Federal Constitution of 1988 haveposed a great challenge for water governance in Brazil. The challengeis intensified when one considers that, according to the NationalWater Act of 1997, watersheds are the basic territorial units forimplementing water policies.It demands Herculean efforts to establish permanent and effectivemeans for integrated water resources management (IWRM) nation-São Francisco River near the Paulo Afonso Hydropower PlantPRODESObjective: Improve water quality in urban areas byreducing water pollution from discharge of untreatedsewage and incentivizing implementation of waterpolicy instrumentsStrategy: OBAWater sectors/users involved: Sanitation services(wastewater treatment)PRODES offers OBA-type subsidies to reimburse up to100 per cent of capital costs for the construction of newwastewater treatment plants or improvement of existingfacilities. Once OBA contracts are signed, the fundsare transferred from the National Treasury to specificescrow accounts. Service providers have then two yearsto finish construction and start operation. From thismoment, a three-year certification process is initiated,with evaluation of operational performance every threemonths. Disbursement of federal grants is conditionalon the achievement of performance goals in wastewatertreatment facilities, with incumbent operators bearing allthe risk of non-performance.From its launch in 2001, PRODES aimed at integratingsanitation and water management policies, for whicha set of measures were adopted. For example, riverbasin committees were tasked with approving proposalsfor investment and operational performance goalspresented by sanitation services operating in theirareas. Proposals were selected on the basis of a moreholistic view over water quality problems, consideringtheir adequacy with the overall strategy set by river basincommittees. Criteria for selecting proposals were linkedto water policy goals, favouring those located in regionsthat had advanced further in the implementation ofwater policy instruments.Key resultsFrom 2001 to 2012, PRODES provided approximatelyUS$129 million to sanitation services that fulfilledtheir contractual obligations in terms of water pollutioncontrol in Brazil. In all, 58 projects were supported inareas with critical conditions of water quality. Thesefacilities have a total operational capacity to remove106,000 tons of organic pollutant load per day, servinga population of approximately 5.3 million.Image: Zig Koch courtesy of the National Water Agency[ 226 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Rossini Sena courtesy of the National Water AgencyTree planting campaign involving school childrenwide. On one hand, the envisioned system of water governance inBrazil must be capable of avoiding gaps or overlaps in the regulationof water uses across federal and state water jurisdictions. Onthe other, it must reach out to local actors and municipal governmentsthat, despite not being in charge of regulating water users, aredirectly responsible for strategic water-related policies such as watersupply, sanitation and urban planning.Coordination among local actors is facilitated by collaborativewater governance strategies applied at the regional level by deliberativewater forums. Nevertheless, there is still a vacuum of politicalagreements between the federal government and the states, thelatter exercising an overwhelming control over water resourcesin Brazil. Progress in this direction has been hampered by manyfactors – for instance, party politics have narrowed the opportunitiesfor long-standing alliances throughout election cycles. But bylooking ahead we can see new possibilities for water cooperationin Brazil’s federal system.First, it is necessary to recognize that state water systems arethe main gears of Brazil’s water governance engine. Apart fromthe streams of water shared by two or more states and reservoirsbuilt by the federal government, all inland waters, including allgroundwater reserves, fall under state jurisdiction.Strengthening water governance at the state level is,therefore, the starting point for any future progresstoward IWRM in Brazil. Only then will it be possibleto integrate the actions undergone by the states in acoherent way, according to a long-term view and undera broad national strategy.This is the rationale behind the most recent politicalagreement between federal and state water authorities.The National Pact for Water Resources Managementrepresents an outstanding political achievement,revealing that state water managers are keen to makecommitments under a national agreement as long asthey retain autonomy to implement their water policiesand have an opportunity to improve their own systems.Most important, however, is the strategy outlined forthe National Pact’s implementation. State governmentswill be invited to sign up to it on a voluntary basis. Theywill issue state decrees to formalize their commitmentsto cooperate with federal and other state water authorities.Then, another process will be initiated at the state[ 227 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONlevel involving all stakeholders represented in state water councils.Members of state councils will be responsible for establishing policygoals for their own state systems based on the major water challengesidentified in their regions. In addition, state water councilswill be in charge of overseeing compliance with these goals on anannual basis, a condition that will determine whether or not statepublic authorities receive federal grants.This is part of a new goal-oriented initiative called Progestão(Pro-management). In this case, however, the ultimate goal is notto improve water quality by intervening on water-related policiesbut to induce continuing advancements in water policy througha permanent cooperation effort between the federal governmentand the states.Only states that become a party to the National Pact will be eligibleto receive funds from Progestão. Individual contracts will besigned with each partner state, in which agreed water policy goalswill be translated into contractual goals and obligations for a fiveyearperiod. Funds will be made available to state public authoritiesat the beginning of each fiscal year, according to the policy goalsthey have achieved the previous year.As such, non-state actors will play a greater role in Brazil’swater policy. Water cooperation among federal and state publicauthorities will no longer be restricted to isolated, dissociated andtime-limited initiatives.Challenges aheadKeeping to the old course of state-led and centralized waterpolicymaking would certainly be an easier political option in anewly-borne democratic regime. From the beginning, it was evidentthat involving citizens in water-related decision-making processesand coordinating state action in a three-tier system of governmentwould be a challenging task. Nonetheless, that was the option takenin 1988 by the framers of the new Brazilian Constitution and bylawmakers that, a few years later, enacted the first state water lawsand the National Water Act in 1997.It is still too early to say whether water managers in Brazil willcope with the challenge of implementing the envisioned watergovernance model. But it is certain that their chances of successdepend on their cooperation with each other. Water cooperation inBrazil will be crucial to securing the democratic values embeddedin its legal framework.Important steps have been taken in the right direction. Periodicmeetings and face-to-face interactions in councils and committeeshave provided some of the cement that made state and non-stateactors cooperate with each other – and cooperation among themimproved significantly over time. The continuing exercise of politicaljudgement, of questioning each other’s view on matters of watermanagement, of agreeing to disagree, of trying to build consensusand majorities – all this has contributed to reaching a new level ofwater governance in Brazil.But an even bigger challenge lies ahead: to promote cooperationon water throughout the federal system and across differentbranches of the public sector. Goal-oriented strategies such as OBAand PES have been used to integrate water-related policies with positiveresults so far. Now another results-driven programme will betested as a mechanism for integrating federal and state actions. Willit work? It is not possible to say at this moment, but considering thatIWRM is the missing part of Brazil’s democratic governance model,it is worth trying.Mexiana Island in the Amazon BasinWater Producer ProgramObjective: Improve water quality by tackling nonpointsources of pollution in rural areasStrategy: PESWater sectors/users involved: Irrigated agriculture andwater supply systemsThe Water Producer Program was launched by theNational Water Agency of Brazil in 2006 with three mainobjectives: conservation of riparian forests, improvementof soil management in rural areas and recovery ofdegraded areas in watersheds. It aims to substitutecostly instruments of control based on coercive andregulatory actions with the use of less hands-on publicgovernance tactics that rely on economic instrumentsand inter-organization networks. Payment is taken forwatershed services as a strategy to overcome commonbarriers to resolving disputes, bringing stakeholderstogether as partners in joint projects to preventenvironmental degradation.The first steps of the programme involve a generalassessment of major environmental problems,investment needs and, most importantly, potentialbuyers and sellers. This initial assessment is a keyelement in defining targets, service baselines and overallprocedures for monitoring and assessing compliance.Negotiations then take place between upstream serviceproviders (landowners) and downstream water users(water supply systems) and, if agreement is reached,payment schemes are set up for recovering degradedareas or preventing environmental damage.Key resultsFrom 2006 to 2012, the programme supported 20PES initiatives in 13 different states. These includethe Water Conservationist Project, the first water PESscheme established in Brazil, which is known for itsstrong engagement of municipal government and localstakeholders. In all, these initiatives cover an areaof 306,000 hectares, including regions that supplywater to seven state capital cities (São Paulo, Rio deJaneiro, Brasilia, Rio Branco, Palmas, Campo Grandeand Goiania). Around 2,000 landowners are presentlyreceiving payments for watershed services.Image: Rui Faquini courtesy of the National Water Agency[ 228 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONEnvironmental rehabilitation of theLake Pátzcuaro watershed, Michoacán, MexicoMiguel A. Córdova, Appropriate and Industrial Technology Subdivision Head, Mexican Institute of Water Technologyand Ramón Pérez Gil Salcido, Director, Water Program, Gonzalo Río Arronte FoundationWith water as its pivotal element, a comprehensiveprogramme was developed to establish a basis forattaining the sustainable development of the LakePátzcuaro watershed.The programme’s main goals are:• enhancing and promoting environmental awareness and cultureamong the watershed’s inhabitants• seeking consensus regarding the main problems and their solutions• increasing the knowledge of natural resources availability and use• establishing criteria for prioritizing actions• performing and promoting the execution of projects andstructural works that generate tangible benefits for the watershedand its communities• managing and channelling investments to ensure the sustainabilityof the environmental rehabilitation process.In order to achieve this, it was necessary to define and implement astrategic plan based on the identification, prioritization and executionof actions agreed on by the different stakeholders.The Lake Pátzcuaro watershed is located in the state ofMichoacán, Mexico. It is a closed basin, with an area of 929km 2 . Altitudes range from 2,035 to 3,300 metres above sealevel (masl), with an average altitude of 2,369 masl. Meanprecipitation in the area is 775 mm, while mean evaporationis 1,393 mm. The lake covers an area of 126.4 km 2 andhas an average depth of 4.9 m, with a storage volume of619.4 Hm 3 . The population of the watershed is estimatedat 120,000 inhabitants. Its economy is based mainly ontourism, forestry, fishing and craftsmanship, and recentlyon money remittances from its immigrants working in theUSA. Due to its singular beauty and historical relevance,going back to pre-Hispanic times, the region is consideredas one of Mexico’s most emblematic and culturally rich.The indigenous Purépechas people are an important partof the population.With the aim of contributing to the solution of thewatershed’s environmental problems, which havebeen caused by years of deterioration and ecologicalabuse, an agreement was signed in 2003, which gaveImage: Rita Vázquez, IMTALocal educators and community leaders participating in activities to develop the ‘Discover a Watershed: Lake Pátzcuaro’ educator’s guide[ 229 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONrise to the Program for the Environmental Rehabilitation of theLake Pátzcuaro Watershed. This programme incorporates efforts,resources and wills from:• the federal Government through the Ministry of Environmentand Natural Resources, the National Water Commission and theMexican Institute of Water Technology (IMTA)• the Government of the State of Michoacán through the Ministryof Urbanism and Environment• the municipal governments of Pátzcuaro, Quiroga,Tzintzuntzan, Erongarícuaro and Huiramba• the University of Michoacán at San Nicolás de Hidalgo• the Autonomous University of Zacatecas• different non-governmental organizations (NGOs), notably theGonzalo Rio Arronte Foundation• civil society at large.The agreement was ratified by all parties involved on 26 February2008 and concluded in 2011.In order to promote the programme and foster the participationof the population, several cultural activities were developed, especiallyamong children. One of these was a workshop titled ‘Uno,dos, tres por mí y por toda la Cuenca’ (‘One, two, three for meand all the watershed’) 1 , which took place in the city of Quirogawith the participation of more than 300 children. Other workshopson environmental education included ‘Encaucemos el Agua’(‘Let’s Give Water a Course’), ‘Water Culture for Children’, environmentaleducation workshops with a gender approach for menand women of the four lakeside municipalities, training of trainersworkshops, environmental and water culture workshops, and thespecial workshop ‘Discover a watershed: Lake Pátzcuaro’. The latterwas inspired on the Discover a Watershed series from the USA-basedInternational Project Water Education for Teachers, a guide forwhich was published by IMTA in collaboration with the Ministryof Environment and Natural Resources and the Government of theState of Michoacán, with the financial support of the Gonzalo RíoArronte Foundation.Some 225 courses and workshops have been imparted, coveringdiverse topics such as fostering social participation, environmentaleducation and culture, training needs, management and operationof wastewater treatment plants, adaptation and transfer of appropriatewater technologies, and training of trainers. To date, morethan 2,500 people have been trained, among them 1,206 primaryeducation teachers.With the aim of raising awareness on environmental problemsamong the population, motivating social participation and disseminatingachievements, a brochure for promoting the campaign forthe management of solid waste was produced with a print run of110,000 copies. Ten thousand copies of the children’s bookletDiscover Lake Pátzcuaro were produced and distributed and 100sets of the board game Discover a Watershed: Lake Pátzcuaro wereproduced. Three video documentaries – Water, the Lake, Our Life;What we Know about our Forests; and The Lake that Drinks from theTrees – were produced and 100 copies of each distributed. And 100copies of the multimedia Discover a Watershed: Lake Pátzcuaro wereproduced and distributed for use in public schools.The Information Centre on the Mexican Salamander (anendangered species known locally as ‘achoque’) was improved,equipped and provided with additional bibliographical material.At the Regional Centre of Education and Training for SustainableDevelopment in Pátzcuaro, and at the BiotechnologyUnit of Tzurumútaro, demonstrative areas weredeveloped for the transfer of appropriate water technologies.Four environmental education areas (knownas ecological houses) were installed in the four lakesidemunicipalities of the watershed: Pátzcuaro,Erongarícuaro, Quiroga and Tzintzuntzan. A dedicatedwebsite was created and several radio and televisionprogrammes were produced. All of these effortshave helped reach out to the population at all levels,which has led to an increasingly participative, betterinformedsociety with more openness and interest inthe programme.In compliance with the National Water Law, the LakePátzcuaro Watershed Commission was created withsupport from the programme. It was installed on 18May 2004 as an ancillary body of the Lerma-ChapalaWatershed Council to help identify problems andsolution proposals, and support decision-making. Thecommission comprises representatives of all the sectorsand water users involved in the watershed. Among theirfirst actions, its members made a formal commitmentto the programme in order to ensure its continuity andtake on the responsibility of its follow-up and evaluation,so that guidelines could be issued to attain andmaintain the sustainable development of the watershed.In order to improve and increase infrastructure andpractices for treating the wastewater generated in thewatershed that flows into the lake, several studies weredeveloped that have enabled the analysis and assessment,using hydrodynamic models, of proposals for contaminationcontrol. Water collectors have been rehabilitated andfive wetlands have been created for the treatment of ruralwastewater. Prominent among these are Cucuchucho,Santa Fe de la Laguna, Erongarícuaro, San JerónimoPurenchécuaro and San Francisco Uricho, whose treatedwastewater quality now exceeds the requirements of theofficial Mexican standards. In addition, part of the treatedwastewater is used for small-scale agricultural productionand the plants that grow there, such as reed and chuspata(a type of thin cane), are used for producing local handcrafts.In the same context, the rehabilitation of existinginfrastructure has been promoted and supported, as inthe case of the San Jerónimo Purenchécuaro biodigester.Together, these small rural works and actions benefitmore than 10,000 inhabitants in rural areas, around40 per cent of the population with the highest level ofpoverty. Treating wastewater also contributes to thereduction of waterborne diseases which especially affectthe child population, and enhances the image and qualityof touristic services.Noteworthy projects in the area of sanitation includethe main collector of the Guani River and the rehabilitationof the San Pedrito and Las Garzas wastewatertreatment plants in Pátzcuaro. With these works, 120litres per second (l/s) of wastewater can be treated,which represents close to 60 per cent of the totaldischarges within the watershed. Since both plantscomply with regulatory requirements, they were[ 230 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Miguel A. CórdovaImage: Roberto Menéndez, IMTAA bicycle adapted as a pedal-powered pump for irrigation purposes in the communityof San Pedro, PátzcuaroThe technified module at the Francisco J. Mújica tree nursery, whichcan produce up to 600,000 plants per yearaccepted for receiving financial aid from the Fund for the Treatmentof Wastewater in Touristic Areas, which will help consolidate theirself-sufficiency. Some of the wetlands (Cucuchucho, Santa Fe de laLaguna and Erongarícuaro, which produce 8 l/s in total) are alsoeligible for this fund.The water utilities of Pátzcuaro, Quiroga, Erongarícuaro andTzintzuntzan have worked on the detection and repairing of leaks,which has resulted in preventing losses of more than 75 l/s in thefour townships. For example, in Quiroga, losses due to leaks havebeen reduced by 25 l/s and water pressure was increased in thenetwork, thus considerably improving drinking water services tothe population. In Pátzcuaro, three of the 10 hydrometric districtswere divided in sectors, and with the partial rehabilitation of the SanGregorio Aqueduct, losses were reduced by 15 l/s. In the four townships,wells were equipped with macrometers and user records wereupdated. These works and the actions deriving from them benefitmore than 70,000 inhabitants, close to 60 per cent of the total populationof the watershed. In addition several studies and actions weremade in order to improve and update water and sanitation rates,which have helped to significantly increase the revenues of waterutilities in Pátzcuaro and Erongarícuaro.Some 24 water springs have been located, rehabilitated andprotected. Three of them were habilitated to be used as drinkingwater supply sources. For example, from the Las Palmas andTzentzénguaro springs, 12 l/s and 10 l/s are channelled to thecommunities of Quiroga and Tzentzénguaro respectively.In order to reduce the problems associated with extreme poverty,the transfer and appropriation of water technologies has beenpromoted. In this regard, 4,749 houses have been adapted withseveral systems for water harvesting, extraction, conduction, storage,purification and consumption. These include rainwater harvestingsystems, pedal-powered pumps, cisterns, solar disinfection systems,biofilters and family orchards equipped with selfoperatingirrigation systems. During this process, theparticipation of indigenous Purépecha women has beencrucial. Thus, the basic water and sanitation requirementsof more than 1,222 rural and indigenous familieshave been covered.In the upper part of the watershed, several projectshave been implemented to support reforestation andcontrol soil erosion. A series of practices have beentransferred and adapted for the conservation of 10priority microwatersheds. Specifically, this includesforest rehabilitation in more than 1,649 hectares. Thishas entailed planting species such as Pinus pseudostrobus,Pinus greggii and Pinus michoacana using bothtraditional excavation methods and drilling machineryin Pátzcuaro, Huiramba, Lagunillas, Erongarícuaro,Tzintzuntzan, Quiroga and Salvador Escalante. Thesurvival rate after the rainy season was over 80 per cent.Reforestation actions were taken along the borders offarms, grasslands and cattle-raising ranches by planting46 km of live fences of white cedar (Cupressuslusitánica). Infiltration ditches and diversion ditcheswere excavated in the townships of Ichupio, Cerritosand Crucero de Chapultepec, thus achieving the infiltrationof 11,352 km 3 of water between 2008 and 2011.In general terms, there are now 56,786 hectares ofnon-eroded land with an adequate forest cover (60.55per cent of tree vegetation/watershed surface area). It isworth noting that in the municipality of Pátzcuaro, atthe Francisco J. Mújica tree nursery, there is a highlytechnifiedmodule with the capacity to produce up to600,000 plants per year.[ 231 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Roberto Menéndez, IMTAFishing activities thrive again in Lake Pátzcuaro, with the famous island of Janitzio in the backgroundRegarding fish production and species protection, the breeding ofwhite fish (Chirostoma estor estor) and the Pátzcuaro Chub (Algansealacustris) has been developed in the township of Urandén de Morelosin the municipality of Pátzcuaro. Thus, more than 15.1 million fishwere bred and released into the lake between 2003 and 2011. A modulewith four ponds was built for breeding white fish in the community ofIchupio and 26 fishing organizations were supported with the provisionof 735 nets for fishing carp. This activity, together with programmes forimproving fishing practices, the removal of aquatic weeds and silt, andthe rehabilitation and conservation of navigable canals and reproductionareas, has enabled a significant improvement in the conditions andcapacity for fish production in Lake Pátzcuaro.The Lake Pátzcuaro watershed has been equipped with 11 weatherstations: five digital pluviometers and six complete climatologicalstations that measure variables such as precipitation, temperature,relative humidity, solar radiation, and wind direction and velocity.As for land use, there was an increase in agricultural land andin urban areas, mainly in the subwatersheds of Pátzcuaro andTzurumútaro compared to 2008. One of the main variables of thewater balance is evapotranspiration, which decreased in four subwatersheds,while surface run-off increased in Ajuno, San Jerónimoand Erongarícuaro.Thanks to the efforts and results associated with more than 250specific actions and projects, it can be proudly said that there hasbeen a series of tangible benefits for the watershed and its inhabitants.While the results obtained so far are very encouraging, it is importantto give continuity to and reinforce the actions foreseen in theprogramme. In this regard, it is worth mentioning the battery ofindicators that have been adopted to follow up the rehabilitationof the watershed. For instance, from 2003 to 2011, treated wastewaterflows went from 52 l/s to 172.5 l/s (23 per cent and 78 percent respectively, from the total wastewater generated in the water-shed). In the same period, sewerage services went from83 per cent to 90 per cent. The water quality index ofthe lake went from 54.5 in 2003 to 62.9 in 2011, whichmeans that today, the current water quality of the lakeis adequate for fishing activities. Fish production wentfrom 50 tons in 2003 to 155 tons in 2011. The numberof inhabitants with water supply services went from1,500 in 2005 to 9,115 in 2011 and those with basicsanitation rose from 2,000 in 2005 to 6,135 in 2011.The number of poverty-stricken inhabitants with selfconsumptionfood production systems went from 750in 2005 to 5,580 in 2011.What has been briefly described here represents only afew examples of the many and diverse actions that havebeen taken to transform this watershed for the benefit ofall its inhabitants. This transformation has been possiblethanks to the cooperation of federal, state and municipalgovernment authorities; of federal agencies such as theNational Water Commission and the Mexican Institute ofWater Technology; of private organizations and NGOs,most notably the Gonzalo Río Arronte Foundation; oflocal schools and academic institutions; and last, butcertainly not least, of the inhabitants of the lakesidecommunities, who with good will and enthusiasm havecollaborated to make this programme a success. Theachievements attained by this programme testify tothe fact that social and inter-institutional cooperation,following a multidisciplinary methodology, constitutesthe best strategy for reverting environmental deterioration,and demonstrates that tackling water issues with anintegrated watershed approach is the best way to solvethe socioenvironmental problems of a given region.[ 232 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONSuez Environnement’s contribution towater cooperation issues: the case of AlgiersJean-Louis Chaussade, CEO, Suez EnvironnementToday, more than one billion people still do not have accessto drinking water and 2.5 billion live without basic sanitation.For many years, Suez Environnement has workedto address the challenge of providing sustainable access to waterand sanitation services, and has supported policy makers inachieving this goal.Suez Environnement strongly believes in the “human right to waterand sanitation,” and welcomes the decision made by the UnitedNations General Assembly in 2010 to recognize access to drinkingwater and sanitation as a fundamental human right. Moreover, thegroup is fully behind the Millennium Development Goals, a resolutionadopted in September 2000 by the member states of the UN,which seeks, among other things, to halve the number of peoplewithout access to drinking water and basic sanitation by 2015.Since 1990, Suez Environnement has been involvedin facilitating access to drinking water and sanitationfacilities around the world. Through the ‘Water for all’programme, Suez Environnement has used its expertiseto help implement innovative solutions that are adaptedto specific regional situations and co-developed with thepopulations and the local authorities concerned. So far,the group has given access to drinking water to an additional12.8 million people and given access to sanitationto 6.6 million people.To achieve this success, Suez Environnementencourages the establishment of public-private partnershipsto enlist the help of local stakeholders andfind suitable solutions to the challenges and problemsthey face. In line with this, the group facilitatesImage: Suez Environnement, Krista BoggsToday, 100 per cent of the water that is distributed in Algiers is drinkable and available 24/7[ 233 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONdialogue around water and sanitation issues, holding regularconsultation meetings to improve corporate strategy and bettermeet the expectations of society.Sustainable water managementAs part of its vision to promote access to water, sanitation, wastewatertreatment and waste management in developing countries, SuezEnvironnement has adopted a new approach to setting up contractswith public authorities. To ensure more successful outcomes, thegroup has developed more flexible contractual models, which allowthe parties involved to work on initiatives that are best suited to localrequirements and specifically meet local environmental challenges.By allowing them to develop tools, processes and methodologiesthat work specifically for local communities, they are more likely toengender trust, promote awareness, transfer knowledge and achievelong-term success.Management contracts, such as those that Suez Environnementhas signed in Algiers, Algeria; Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; Johannesburg,South Africa; and Amman, Jordan, clearly illustrate the developmentof this new strategy. In short, it requires two parties to commit to aprecise action plan and then deliver on it. This involves setting up alocal training team to share Suez Environnement’s expertise, workingwith the community to roll out a jointly-defined programme, ensuringpublic investments are made in network modernisation andexpansion, and making a commitment to improve service quality.The case of AlgiersBefore 2006, the majority of the population in Algiers, around3.2 million people, did not have reliable access to drinking water.Sometimes running water was available for just a few hours per dayor a few days per week. The main causes of this were an insufficientwater supply, obsolete infrastructures and serious leaks in the waternetwork, which restricted the amount of water thatcould be provided. Moreover, the bay of Algiers waspolluted: sewers weren’t maintained, and wastewaterpumping stations and treatment plants were either stillunder construction or being renovated. This resulted inonly six per cent of wastewater being treated.To deal with this situation, the Algerian public authoritiesdecided to implement a national water managementstrategy. The objective was to improve the population’swater supply, redevelop the sanitation system and encouragewaste reduction, beginning with Algiers in 2006 andthen moving onto the country’s other main cities in 2008– Oran, Constantine and Annaba. The Algerian authoritieswere commited to maintaining water and sanitationas public services. The tariff, fixed at national level, hasnot been changed since 2006. Socially sustainable, it isprogressive to discourage wasting water and with a socialtariff addressing low-income households.Suez Environnement and the Algerian state workedclosely together to evaluate the situation and developan action plan that met objectives. Water authorities,including the Algérienne des Eaux (ADE) and theOffice National de l’Assainissement (ONA), createdthe Société des Eaux et de l’Assainissement d’Alger(SEAAL), the public Algerian company that would beresponsible for overseeing all water and wastewaterservices across Algiers and Tipaza. To ensure SEAALcould handle this responsibility, it was allocatedsignificant public funding and human resources. Theauthorities also signed a five-and-a-half-year managementcontract with Suez Environnement. In 2011, thiswas renewed for a further five years (2011-2016).Image: Suez Environnement, Krista BoggsImage: Suez Environnement, Krista BoggsBy sharing its expertise with SEAAL workers, Suez Environnement is helping toempower the Algerian companyOne of Suez Environnement’s main objectives is to improve watersanitation services[ 234 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Suez Environnement, Krista BoggsSuez Environnement has played a key role in helping to improve the quality of water in AlgiersSuez Environnement committed to four main operational objectives:to establish quality water distribution, 24/7; to improve theoperation of the sanitation systems and contribute to improvingbathing and coastal water quality in Algiers; to retrofit and managethe water and wastewater assets in a sustainable manner; and toput in place a modern and efficient customer management systemto improve customer satisfaction levels. The other main objectivewas for Suez Environnement to share its expertise with the localSEAAL teams.A major axis of this public-private partnership also consistedof supporting growth in performance. The authorities constantlyfollow the perfomance of services through monthly detailed reporting,a management tool monitoring contractual indicators sharedby the partners and management bodies. The aim is to analyseevery service from the customer’s point of view and ensure it meetstheir expectations.A contract creating local expertiseEnhancing the business and managerial skills of the SEAAL staff is akey criterion in Suez Environnement’s contract. By sharing its expertisewith SEAAL workers, Suez Environnement is helping to empowerthe public entity and ensure the project is a long-term success.In Algiers, Suez Environnement has developed a global methodologycalled Water International Knowledge Transfer Initiative(WIKTI) to help transfer its knowledge of the management of waterand wastewater services to the local workers. This initiative is thefirst of its kind that is taking place on such a large scale.Using WIKTI, Suez Environnement experts started off by conductingan initial analysis and diagnosis of each of the water services.Then, working with Algerian stakeholders, they quantified theperformance targets of services, and defined mid-termstrategic action plans for each activity.Suez Environnement has provided daily support toSEAAL staff on the ground, supplying 27 full-time expertsand offering focused technical assistance, to improve operationalpractices and modernize all management tools.In addition to WIKTI, the Optimizing Personal Talentsmethodology was developed in 2011 to assess managerialperformance. This methodology uses a frameworkthat focuses on managerial and personal skills (theSEAAL Managers Charter), using international standardsand adapted to the Algerian socio-cultural context.Each manager has to commit to an individual five-yearroadmap, which involves both practical and personalizedmanagerial actions that they need to master. Eachmanager can progress and master these managerial skillson a step-by-step basis, prioritising the areas they mostwant to work on first. The aim is to enhance managerialskills and maximize the potential of Algerian managers.Ultimately, this approach helps to build leadershipperformance and create transferable best practices thatcan be adopted throughout the entire company.The managerial maturity should allow local teams toguarantee the continuity and the quality of the publicservice in accordance with international standards, afterthe departure of Suez Environnement.Visible results for the inhabitants of AlgiersSince this public-private partnership was forged sevenyears ago, noticeable and measurable improvements[ 235 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Suez Environnement, Krista BoggsSuez Environnement works closely with SEAAL workers to improve their skillshave been made to Algiers’ water and wastewater services accordingto international standards.Since 2010, thanks to the joint efforts of the state, whichinvested in new infrastructures (conventional and non-conventionalwater resources, wastewater treatment plants, new pipingand main sewers), Suez Environnement and SEAAL, whichimproved service management and the efficiency of pre-existinginfrastructures, 100 per cent of the water that is distributedis drinkable and available 24 hours a day, seven days a week,compared to just 8 per cent of water in 2006. 143,000 leaks wererepaired, 231 km of pipes were replaced and 330,000 metres wereinstalled. All leaks are now repaired within two days compared toan average of 4.2 days in 2006. Water quality has also been dealtwith. Since 2008, water bacteria levels have not exceeded industryguidelines. The number of customers in Algiers increasedfrom 422,000 in 2006 to 558,000 in 2012. Around 250,000telephone calls per year are processed in SEAAL’s Call Center,which is open 24/7. 85 per cent of customers are satisfied withthe service.In addition to supplying all inhabitants with drinking water,the public-private partnership has also focused on improvingwastewater treatment. Today, 53 per cent of the wastewater of theWilaya of Algiers is now treated as opposed to just six per cent in2006. Since the project started, 3,574 km of wastewater sewershave been cleared and 225 km have been renovated. In addition,67 of Algiers’ 72 beaches are now approved for bathing, comparedto 39 in 2006.The project is also proving to be financially successful: SEAALhas kept to its business plan and is already making substantialcost savings.The Algerian authorities’ confidence in SuezEnvironnement was proven in 2011 when they extendedtheir agreement with the company for a further five yearsuntil 2016. This new contract involves making furtherimprovements to the water and wastewater treatmentservices available to the 600,000 inhabitants of the Wilayaof Tipaza, located west of Algiers. In addition to replicatingthe results already achieved in Algiers, the contract alsosets out to ensure the sustainable autonomy of SEAAL.Cooperation is a key success factorThe close collaboration between Algiers authorities andSuez Environnement was fundamental to the successof this project. It highlights the importance of settingobjectives, creating action plans and making decisionsin a collaborative manner. Suez Environnement’s abilityto formulate an overall strategy to improve servicelevels, as well as strengthen the local infrastructure toensure sustainable progress, was also key.Suez Environnement is committed to helping itscustomers achieve their objectives and find the idealsolution tailored to their specific concerns. Thecompany’s vision is to bring new solutions to marketto help customers deal with increasingly complexenvironmental problems. Working with others, SuezEnvironnement aims to stimulate creativity andencourage the emergence of new ideas. The result:innovative water management solutions that providesignificant economic and environmental benefits, andsustainable results.[ 236 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONPreparing Denmark for climate changesJan Tøibner, Aarhus Water Ltd.Denmark is among the best in the world when it comesto water supply and wastewater purification. Amongother things, this is due to a close and fruitful cooperationbetween public water supply companies, forward-lookingmunicipalities, high-tech companies in the water industry andinnovative research and educational institutions. Danish watersolutions resonate internationally, and the country’s largestsuppliers of water and wastewater are ready to contributeinternationally with the most recent knowledge and solutions inclimate adaptation, energy optimization, green energy production,reduction of water consumption and improvement ofdrinking water quality.One of the biggest issues facing the Danish water industry at presentis handling the global climate changes which affect the low-lyingparts of Denmark in the event of torrential rainstorms and risingwater levels. Even though the country benefits from large groundwaterreservoirs, its water resources are constrained. These challengestransgress municipal boundaries. Therefore, efforts now focus onestablishing greater units and new collaborations, so that watersupply companies will be better prepared to meet the challengesof the future – both in terms of competence and technology – byworking together nationally. For example, the three largest watersupply companies in Denmark, Hofor, Vandcenter Syd and AarhusVand, have started working together regionally, nationally andinternationally in the fields of security of supply, the environment,energy and sustainability to name a few. One aim of this cooperationis to contribute to the establishment of sustainable cities and smartcities, for instance by exploiting rainwater.Working with the entire water life cycleAarhus Vand A/S (Aarhus Water Ltd.) is one of the leading companiesin the Danish water industry, and it works with the entirelife cycle of water – from consumers turning on the tap for adrink of fresh water, to the return of purified wastewater fromhouseholds and industries to nature. The company operates in thefield of drinking water and wastewater treatment in the city andits surrounding rural areas, working with the treatment, distributionand collection of wastewater. Cooperating closely with AarhusKommune, Aarhus Vand is in charge of planning and executinga wide variety of environmental and urban development projectswhich take climate changes into consideration.This requires Aarhus Vand to develop intelligent and future-proofsolutions. Therefore, the company has a long-standing traditionof taking part in research and development projects at home andabroad. It aims to be at the forefront of both knowledge and technologyin the water and wastewater industry, and to ensure thatit continues to attract the foremost experts in the water sector.These projects will support and improve Aarhus Vand’sknowledge of the activities it wants to initiate to obtainnot only better and cheaper plants, products, servicesand working processes, but also an environmental gain.The purpose of taking part in research and developmentprojects is that they lead to the implementationof new technology and methods. Many good and usableresults have been brought about by Aarhus Vand’s closecooperation with researchers, advisers and internationally-focusedcompanies in the water industry. Oneexample is the testing of a new and efficient bottomaeration system and the advanced online control of oneof the company’s water treatment plants, resulting ina 45 per cent reduction in CO 2emissions and powerconsumption in wastewater treatment.Another example is the full-scale system the companyhas installed to remove phosphorus from wastewaterbased on a pilot project. This system reduces the operatingcosts of the water treatment plant and producesstruvite, a clean and environmentally friendly fertilizercontaining high levels of phosphorus, which is a scarceresource. The plant is a lighthouse project and the onlyone of its kind in Denmark.A third example is the Energy Smart Water Utilitiesproject, which includes an examination of the energypotential of water by Aarhus Vand and several partnersacross the water and energy sector. This is done byusing water pressure to produce power and by movingpower consumption in the water industry from dayto night, thereby exploiting renewable energy in thewater sector.Another important topic for Aarhus Vand is tomake water visible in the town. The company benefitsfrom more than 10 years of experience in opening upthe city of Aarhus and making water visible, facilitatingthe use of water as a recreational element. At thesame time, this visibility also protects the city againstfloods caused by torrential downpour. Examplesinclude the uncovering of the river that runs throughAarhus city centre and the creation of the two lakes,Aarslev Engsø and Egå Engsø, which purify waterfrom fields while also serving as large reservoirs. Ata national level, Aarhus Vand takes part in the ‘Vandi byer’ (Water in cities) project along with AarhusKommune among others. This is the biggest Danishresearch project with an overall focus on the climateadaptation of Danish cities, their infrastructure andtheir water supply structure.[ 237 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Aarhus VandImage: Aarhus VandMeasures such as separating rainwater from wastewater help to improve water hygieneTree-planting helps to protect Denmark’s groundwater reservoirsPartneringAt a regional level, Aarhus Vand has used partnering since 2006 as acooperative way of working when renovating drainpipes, and since2008 when renovating water mains. By cooperating in this way, thecompany pulls together with its partners because all have agreedon clear and common objectives. If the objectives are met, bothparties are due a cash bonus. This is cooperation based on dialogue,trust and openness, and it keeps the company constantly focused ondevelopment and improvements. Through structured knowledgesharing,the partners are focused on finding the right solution thefirst time – in terms of both technology and process.The results of this cooperative way of working speak for themselves.Aarhus Vand’s documentation shows that partnering has broughtabout a notable lowering of unit prices: 18 per cent on average ondrainpipes (after four years) and 7 per cent on average on water mains(after two years). It has led to improved quality of the work, greatersatisfaction for citizens and improved cooperation, which meansthat both Aarhus Vand’s employees and those of its partners are nowpursuing assignments that are carried out using partnering.Prepared – Enabling ChangeAt a European level, Aarhus Vand and the consultancy and researchorganization DHI head an international consortium called Prepared– Enabling Change, which consists of 35 countries and partners.The consortium is carrying out the largest collaborative environmentalproject in the European Union on the research and developmentof technology for climate adaptation in the fields of water supplyand wastewater management. Its purpose is especially to exchangeknowledge and experience at the highest international level whilestriving to halt the consequences of climate changes such as downpoursand increases in temperature. The European water sectorneeds to prepare itself for climate changes that may affect the sectorin different ways, such as flooding, droughts, changes in tempera-ture and more extreme events. The Prepared projectaddresses the practical problems and decisions that theurban water utilities have to deal with. In the project,researchers, universities and technology suppliers worktogether with urban utilities to produce an advancedstrategy to meet the future challenges for water supplyand sanitation brought about by climate change.The Prepared project originates from the WSSTPthematic working group, Sustainable WaterManagement in Urban Areas. Over a period of five years,Prepared will work with a number of urban utilities inEurope and worldwide to develop advanced strategies tomeet anticipated challenges, brought about by climatechange, in the water supply and sanitation sectors. Theproject will provide a framework that links comprehensiveresearch with development programmes in theseutilities. The Prepared vision will provide significantsynergistic opportunities that the utilities can use toimprove their preparedness for ongoing changes relatingto the provision of water supply and sanitation.Project outcomes will be used as input for the planningand rehabilitation programmes of participating cities,and the experience gained by the utilities will then beshared with other players in the European water sector.The ultimate objective is rehabilitation based onconcern for the environment and investment programmesfor water supply and sanitation systems (including stormwater).The cities and utilities involved will be preparedand resilient to the effects of climate change in the shortand long term. Implementation of the project started inFebruary 2010 and is expected to end in January 2014.Three years into the project, Prepared has completed theresearch and testing of solutions to challenges related to[ 238 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Aarhus WaterRapid urban development has made effective wastewater management a priority in the city of Aarhusclimate change that the urban water sector needs to address. The finalyear of the project is dedicated to the demonstration of real-life situationsat the Prepared water utilities. Successful cooperation betweenresearchers, technology suppliers and water utilities has resulted inapproximately 30 on-site demonstrations. The final conference willbe held in January 2014 in Aarhus, Denmark.Contributing knowledge and expertiseAarhus Vand leads the way globally when it comes to effective wastewatermanagement. Alongside DHI, it contributes to the Prepared projectwith its knowledge and expertise from the Aarhus Å-projektet (AarhusRiver project). This project is about flood prevention and preventingwastewater from overflowing into lakes, streams and bays by creatinglarge basins and ensuring optimal control of basins, sewerage plantsand water treatment plants. It is a full-scale project, fully financed andtherefore ideal in this context. Along parts of the Aarhus River and onthe Port of Aarhus, urban development is rapid and will continue at afast pace in the coming years. The Aarhus River was previously covered,but it is now uncovered and has become a recreational element in thecity. The part of the harbour close to Aarhus has been converted fromindustrial harbour to new city areas. Here, too, water and canals will beimportant recreational elements. In 2005, the Municipality of Aarhusdecided to improve the quality of water hygiene in receiving watersthrough the Aarhus River project, in order to support opportunitiesfor the recreational use of Lake Brabrand (Brabrand Sø), the AarhusRiver and the Port of Aarhus. In more measurable terms, this decisionis driven by the Water Framework Directive and the Bathing WaterDirective and the planned solution must be adapted to the expectedclimate change scenario.As an integrated part of the Aarhus River project, ArhusVand has implemented one of the world’s most advancedsystems in which the control of all installations is coordinatedfrom one point. A challenge for the city of Aarhusis the recreational area, Lake Brabrand, which is closeto the city centre and is connected to Aarhus Harbourthrough the small Aarhus River. The water in the lake,river and harbour was adversely affected by combinedsewer overflow, stormwater drains and effluent fromwastewater treatment plants. Efficient and flexible operation,especially during rainfall events, will be secured bynew integrated control and an early warning system. Thiswill improve water hygiene, including during expectedclimate change scenarios like intense rainfall and risingsea levels. The demonstration will involve improvedrainfall monitoring, integrated control of sewer andwastewater treatment plants, and early warnings on thewater quality of receiving waters. By taking the challengesposed by climate change into account, excellentwater quality will be produced by implementing thedesigned solution of sufficient basin volume, sufficientlyhigh water quality through increased hydraulic capacity,and disinfection at the wastewater treatment plant.As part of the Prepared project, the Aarhus River projecthas resulted in improved cooperation with colleagues fromLyon, Berlin and Barcelona. It enables international environmentalresearch to be applied concretely and locally,with the intention of cooperating across borders using thelatest technology in the fight against climate changes.[ 239 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONDeveloping community water servicesand cooperation in Finland and the SouthTapio S. Katko, UNESCO Chair in Sustainable Water Services, Tampere University of Technology;and Antti Rautavaara, Senior Water Advisor, Ministry for Foreign AffairsIn water management it is important to distinguish betweenwater resources and water services. Water use for variouspurposes is managed at several levels – from internationaltreaties and transboundary rivers and groundwater areas towater courses of various sizes. Some 270 transboundary riversflow and 450 groundwater areas are located in at least twosovereign countries.In this article, water services refer to community water supply, sewerageand, to some extent, stormwater management. These are typicallymanaged at lower levels: from the inter-municipal level to cities andcommunities, villages and on-site systems. These systems can also belinked to each other. Water services involve a large number of stakeholders:citizens, communities, municipal decision makers, waterutilities, professional and other associations, educational and traininginstitutions, ministries and other authorities, and research sponsors.The challenge is how to promote smooth collaboration between thesevarious partners and find appropriate roles for each of them.In Finland, municipalities are in charge of providingwater services while municipality-owned utilitiesmainly produce the actual services. There is also a longtradition of smaller, water cooperative-run systems inrural areas. The experience gained from a diversity ofoptions is perhaps one of Finland’s major strengths andis reflected in the activities supported by the FinnishGovernment in developing economies, especially Africa.Finnish development cooperation and policyFinland’s human rights-based development policy andcooperation focus on four priority areas: a democraticand accountable society that promotes human rights; aninclusive green economy that promotes employment;sustainable management of natural resources and environmentalprotection; and human development. Thewater sector, with all its levels and sub-sectors, fits wellwithin this policy frame.Multilevel governance and relations between water resources and water servicesWATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT“Global Village”Global policy frameworksTransboundary watersTransboundary commissionsStatesRegionsCentral ministriesRiver basin bodiesMunicipalitiesCommunitiesHouseholdsManagement at thelowest appropriate levelProperty ownerWATER SERVICES MANAGEMENTWater and wastewaterundertakingsUser associationsOn-site systemsSource: Pekka Pietilä[ 240 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONSince the mid-1960s, the water sector – particularly water supplyand sanitation – has been one of the major targets of Finnish developmentpolicy and cooperation. Official development assistance(ODA) increased in the 1980s and peaked in 1991 at 0.8 per cent ofgross national income. This upward trend was followed by a deeptrough in the early 1990s which cut resources by half and was laterfollowed by an instrumental shift from project-based aid towardssector-wide approaches where funds were increasingly channelledthrough multilateral trust funds. At this juncture some innovativeand functional ODA instruments also ceased to exist, such as universitycollaboration.In the early part of the millennium the water sector accountedfor some 2-5 per cent of bilateral cooperation activities, but itsshare increased steeply in 2007-2011 as a result of the policy shift.Currently, water sector ODA is almost EUR 60 million a year oraround 5 per cent of total ODA; in 2012-2016 the water sector willbe the single largest sector of cooperation in the main partner countries.The focus has also shifted to multiple use of developmentcooperation instruments and, geographically, to fragile and postconflictcountries.Finnish development cooperation in water servicesOfficial water sector development cooperation supported by theFinnish Government has progressed gradually based on lessonslearned. In Eastern Africa many new independent governmentshad ambitious plans and policies including the free water policy.Although understandable based on the political passions of the day,this policy soon proved unrealistic, though it took decades for manycountries to abandon it.In the late 1960s and early 1970s individual experts werestationed at the national water authorities of recipient countries inEthiopia, Kenya and Tanzania. A postgraduate programme designedImproved water supply in the Amhara Region of EthiopiaImage: Harri Mattilafor the needs of developing countries was conducted atHelsinki University of Technology (1972-74), followedby six courses in 1979-1992 at Tampere University ofTechnology (TUT). Participants in the latter courseswrote their MSc theses mainly in their home countries.A special BSc civil engineering programme was also runfor 14 Namibian students at TUT before the countrygained independence.Current development cooperation supported by theFinnish Government in the water sector uses variousforms and instruments. In addition to the bilateral activitiesdescribed below, Finland supports many activitiesin the sector through international agencies, academiaand non-governmental organizations (NGOs).Collaboration projectsThe Finnish Government started to support bilateralprojects after sending out individual experts in the late1960s and early 1970s. The first long-term project wasin Southern Tanzania in 1970-1993. Such projects havealso been undertaken in Sri Lanka, Kenya, Viet Nam,Egypt, Mozambique, Nepal, Namibia, Ethiopia, Sudanand Southern Sudan.In the 1980s these projects started to change fromconstruction orientation (supply-driven) to expertbasedand development activities (demand-driven).Gradually, sanitation and hygiene education wereincluded in the projects, and policy coherence betweenwater, education and health became integral to theoperations. The main focus has been on rural cooperation,but since the 1990s urban water supply andsewerage have also been supported in Viet Nam, Egyptand Mozambique. Since 2007 urban projects havefocused on small towns in Palestine and Viet Nam.EthiopiaAfter the fall of the communist military regime inEthiopia, a Finnish-supported water and environmentproject was conducted in the Amhara region(1994-2011) and replicated in the Benishangul-Gumuzregions (2008-13). Both aimed to increase capacityand community ownership of community-based water,sanitation and hygiene (WASH) structures. These weremainly shallow wells and spring protections, withCommunity-Led Total Sanitation as the main channelfor sanitation support. Thereafter the Community-LedAccelerated WASH programme institutionalized thecommunity managed project (CMP) model, which hasbecome accepted as one of the national financial modelsfor rural WASH.CMP has solved the issue of managing local fundingand optimal allocation of roles and responsibilities inthe WASH process. The investment funds needed forconstruction are channelled to communities by a localmicrofinance institution. The CMP approach is alsoused in projects implemented and financed by theEthiopian Government as well as the United NationsChildren’s Fund (UNICEF) in some regions. Theapproach has proved successful and has gained inter-[ 241 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Sanna-Leena RautanenAn irrigation channel in the Bhatakatiya municipality of Far West Nepal, which also leads water to a 30 kW hydropower plantnational recognition. It has made implementation four times fasterwhile making communities feel like owners, as well as significantlyimproving the quality of construction. The key is to allow themunicipality (woreda) to assume its central role as supervisor,while implementation responsibility lies with the community andthe financial flow is managed by a financial intermediary.During 2007-2013 the two Finnish-funded projects in Ethiopiahave provided improved water supply and sanitation to some 1.2million people at a cost of 36 cents per taxpayer per year. It hasimproved hygienic and health conditions, lowered mortality andimproved children’s opportunities to go to school. Women havealso gained more time for productive purposes and family welfare aswell as for wider participation in social development. The approachis also linked to the wider development objective of making administrationmore decentralized.In Ethiopia, Finland has partnered with the World Bank WaterSupply Program (WB-WSP) with the aim of enhancing the utilizationof successful bilateral Finnish project-based experiences on a nationalscale, such as institutionalization of the CMP model and establishmentof the One WASH National Program. Finland has also teamedup with UNICEF to pool funding needed for the Capacity BuildingPooled Fund for WASH, which was established under the UNICEFumbrella for the benefit of overall sector capacity development.KenyaKenya has been one of the main partner countries of the Finnishwater sector. The Kenya Finland Cooperation rural water supplyproject in Western Kenya was carried out in 1981-1996. In 2009Finland returned as a supporter through the WaterSector Trust Fund, partly initiated and influenced byearlier Finnish support.NepalThe first bilateral water supply project (Lumbini) inNepal started in 1990 and consisted of several phases.From its initial construction orientation, it developedtowards a more participatory approach involving promotionof gender equity and participation of local NGOs.The wealth of experience gained was valuable when theNepalese rural water policy was revised in 2004.The Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project(RWSSP) in the Mid-West region of Nepal started in2008 and is planned to continue until 2018. A varietyof implementing options and water and sanitationtechnologies are being tested where the major implementingresponsibility lies at the village level. The roleof municipalities is mainly to support, follow, facilitateand build up village level capacities. The aim is todevelop a nationally applicable model where the localgovernment ensures democratic decision-making,promotion of human rights and improvement ofwomen’s conditions.In the Far West region of Nepal, the RWSSP startedin 2006. In addition to drinking water and sanitation, itpromotes small-scale hydropower and irrigation aimedat improving food security. The project promotes tech-[ 242 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: Sari HuuhtanenThe Dry Toilet project in Zambianologies that will enable multiple use of services and use of waterresources for productive purposes. The key requirement for supportis a village-level Water Uses Master Plan that allows the prioritizationand optimization of water resources use. The project is basedon a step-by-step approach through learning on the spot and otherexternal support. In the second phase (2010-15) cooperatives havebeen – and will increasingly be – established with the aim ofpromoting small-scale farming by households.Finland has also supported the UNICEF WASH programme inNepal. By partnering with this multilateral organization, Finlandaims to upscale the bilateral lessons it has learned on the nationallevel and support the move towards a sectoral programme in Nepal.Viet NamIn 1986 Viet Nam started to reform its planned communisteconomy. Finnish support to Hanoi Water Works started in 1985and Haiphong followed in 1990. Both projects lasted some 15 yearsand involved several phases. They began with crisis support for keyareas of the networks in urgent need of rehabilitation and expansion,and developed towards building an independent and operationallysustainable utility.In 1993 a long-term general plan was prepared for Haiphong, afterwhich the World Bank became the major financier while Finlandsupported planning, supervision and management, and governancedevelopment. The commitment to long-term support provedimportant. Other preconditions for success included trust in Finnishknow-how and maintaining a balance between construction, leadership,financial management and human resources development.Water users, especially women, were considered inthe planning, distribution and management of waterservices. The autonomy of water utilities was increased,water tariffs were set at a reasonable level, water meterswere installed, and water leakages were reduced.Finnish support to Hanoi Water Works ended in2000 and for Haiphong in 2004. Thereafter, the latterhas been supported by concessional credits (interest-subsidizedloans). Haiphong Water Works hasimproved its operations considerably, and its benchmarkindicators are of a high international level. In2003 the Water and Sanitation Programme for SmallTowns (WSPST) started, originally in 22 townships.Experience has taught that building adequate capacitiesin conditions like these takes more time than anticipatedas all the same steps need to be taken irrespectiveof the town’s size. The key lesson taught by the WSPSTis that while secure water supply is very high on theagenda of communities, sanitation places much lower.In the current policy and regulatory framework it is alsodifficult to place management of wastewater treatmentfacilities on a sustainable footing.In Viet Nam, Finland also cooperates closely with theWB-WSP, as it is partly funded by Finland and is ina strong position to create key sector knowledge andinfluence the regulatory framework effectively. Finnishexperience is at the disposal of the Government of VietNam and other development partners.[ 243 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONThe current Ethiopian Prime Minister, Ato Hailemariam Desalegn, visiting his olduniversity in Tampere as Foreign Minister in 2012SanitationThe Global Dry Toilet Association of Finland, a professional NGO,was established in 2002. It promotes the use of dry toilets (DT) asa sanitation option through advocacy, research, surveys, seminarsand more. In addition to national activities, the association organizedfour international DT conferences between 2003 and 2012. Ithas also conducted several projects in the developing economiesof Zambia and Swaziland, as well as in Finland and other parts ofEurope. The association tries to raise awareness that water-bornesanitation is not the only option and that alternatives should beseriously considered, especially in areas where water is scarce or therisk of contaminating water bodies exists.EducationThe Finnish-African Water Alumni, consisting of over 100 waterexperts from Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Namibia, Tanzania andZambia, is a substantial and unique network. The alumni havegained key positions, for instance in ministries, public institutions,water utilities, consulting engineering companies, privateconsultants, contracting companies, universities, other traininginstitutes, international agencies and even as leading politicians.The positive impact of education is best shown by the fact thatin 2012 a TUT alumnus, Hailemariam Desalegn, was appointedPrime Minister of Ethiopia. Since 2013 he has been the Chair ofthe African Union.Since the programme ended in 1992, North-South collaborationhas been maintained at some level and it will hopefully become moreactive in the future. The challenge of human resources developmentis the long time frame required by the activities. Interestingly, thecollaborating countries in the South seem to have a similar typeof generation gap in terms of professionals. Within the next fewyears many professionals will retire, making it necessary to educatea new generation as soon as possible. A positive development isImage: Virpi Andersinthat the Finnish Government has recently introducedsome programmes that will also promote North-Southcollaboration as part of the general policy of emphasizinginternational education and research.Domestic cooperation in the water sectorThe majority, if not all water sector actors have organizedthemselves under the Finnish Water Forumumbrella organization. 1 It has a mandate to both exportand develop, which makes it instrumental in bringingtogether sector actors and enabling them to cooperatesmoothly in the highly competitive water servicemarkets. The latest social forum for sector professionalsis on LinkedIn at ‘Finnish Water Professionals forDevelopment’ – a discussion forum allowing Finnishprofessionals to engage in professional dialogue fromthe mountains of Nepal to the rural town of Gilgel-Belesin Ethiopia. Horizontal learning and dialogue are stillkey in bridging knowledge gaps.Lessons learnedAllowing for some inaccuracy, the commonly citedresults of the Finnish-funded ODA show that some 6million people been served with safe water supply andmany more with improved sanitation. For example, theWorld Bank recently estimated that almost 700,000people in Amhara, Ethiopia were served with sanitationthrough the Finnish-funded WSP single donortrust fund.An evaluation of the Finnish-supported water sectorODA was carried out in 2010, covering activities from1995-2009. It presented the following key findings:• Finnish cooperation in the water sector contributesdirectly to improved living conditions for thetargeted beneficiaries• some inadequacies were observed, particularly inproject cycle management and the policy framework• in the visited countries, most of the Finnishprojects have proved remarkable successes• upscaling and replication of positive experiencesare also becoming major challenges: they shouldbe incorporated into the design of successiveproject phases.A more recent meta-evaluation compiling evaluationsfrom many sectors indicates that the water sector hasbeen quite successful and suggests that additionalresources should be allocated to the sector for futurecollaboration.Especially in water services, local political, economic,social, technological, environmental and legislativeconditions have to be taken into account. Yet we seemto have many common challenges. One of the mostdemanding ones is the question of ageing infrastructure,its renovation need and related costs. Another commoninterest is to improve services and conditions throughvarious types of reforms and development work. Thus,we have many lessons to learn and share. We are in thesame proverbial boat, so why not fish together?[ 244 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONExamples of cooperation in the Czech Republicflood forecasting and information serviceJan Danhelka, Eva Soukalova and Lucie Brezkova, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute;and Jan Cernik, Czech Development AgencyFlood protection is a major part of practical water managementand a way of reducing the damage caused by themost prominent type of natural disaster in CentralEurope. In the Czech Republic flood protection, especiallyforecasting and information services, involves cooperation atvarious levels from local to international.In the aftermath of the disastrous 1997 floods, hydrological forecastingmodels have been developed. The 2002 floods triggered, amongother things, a change in data measurement and data transmissionfrom meteorological and hydrological stations. In response to the2009 flash floods, many local warning systems have been installed.Providing information to municipalitiesThe national network of water gauging sites, which is operatedby the Czech Hydrometeorological Institute (CHMI), consists ofalmost 400 stations equipped with automatic monitoring systemsfeaturing online data transmission to the central database over amobile telephone network (using GPRS protocol). The stations’An example of a warning SMS from station Predlance at Smeda River (northern Bohemia)Image: CHMIother function is to transmit short text messages(SMS) notifying of major events registered at thestation. For the needs of CHMI, as the operator ofthe stations, such notifications also include informationabout the technical condition of the station (forexample, the back-up battery voltage), which helpsto support the operation of the measuring network.However, the key pieces of information are those thatindicate that the threshold water stages, correspondingto the flood levels at each particular site, havebeen exceeded.CHMI approached regional and local flood controlauthorities (in the Czech Republic, these are regionalauthorities and municipal authorities administeringregions and municipalities). The institute offeredthem inclusion in its distribution list of specified textmessages. A number of users subscribe to this freeservice as the quickest method of notification that doesnot suffer from delays in the delivery of informationduring central data processing.CHMI publishes observed water stages, dischargesand precipitation on its web page for the generalpublic with an update frequency of 10 minutes. 1In addition, CHMI provides two special non-publicwebsites with the water stage data to ensure its availabilityeven in case of overload of the public website.However, recent flash floods affected many smallstreams that are not covered by the national monitoringnetwork. A programme of developing localwarning systems, targeted at small watercourses atrisk of flash floods but not monitored in the nationalmonitoring system, was established. This has beensuccessful thanks to experience with the above systemof data transmission. Since 2009, a total of 341 projectshave been supported through this programme underthe Operational Programme Environment, which ismanaged by the Ministry of the Environment as thenational flood protection authority.International cooperation in the forecasting serviceA total of 19 countries share the Danube basin,making it the basin shared by the largest numberof countries. One of these is the Czech Republic,through which the Danube does not actually flow;however, the Czech Republic contains approximately[ 245 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATION84 per cent of the Morava basin, in terms of its area (26,580 km 2 ),and this is the seventh largest tributary to the Danube with anaverage discharge of 120 m 3 per second.In the aftermath of the disastrous 2002 and 2006 floods that also hitthe Thaya basin, the Lower Austria Government requested an extensionof the discharge forecasts, computed at CHMI’s Brno RegionalOffice and employing the HYDROG model. This was to include,The Morava-Dyje confluenceThe above detail shows: sub-basin borders (red lines); water gaugesoperated by CHMI (yellow), Povodí Moravy (orange), SHMI and Lower Austriahydrology department (red); and new monitoring sites operated by MoravaRiver Authority (purple)Source: CHMIinitially, the upper stretches of the Thaya basin and, after2006, the area of the Morava and Thaya confluence. In2007, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) wassigned with Lower Austria’s hydrology department. TheMoU contains approval of cooperation in the forecastingof discharges in the upper Thaya basin between CHMIand Lower Austria’s hydrology department. Every day,CHMI transmits discharge forecasts for two sites in theupper part of the Thaya basin, at Schwarzenau on theAustrian Thaya and at Raabs on the Thaya.Under ‘European Territorial Cooperation Austria-CzechRepublic 2007-2013’, the M00090 Morava-Thaya FloodForecasting System project was put in place. The projecthas resulted in an extension of the existing HYDROGforecasting system to include the Hohenau (Austria)/Moravský Svätý Ján (Slovak Republic) site on the Morava,downstream of the Morava-Thaya confluence.A study from 2007 2 contains a decision that thecurrent HYDROG forecasting model, 3 applied to theCzech part of the basins, would be expanded to coverthe Hohenau/Moravský Svätý Ján site on the Moravaand the current monitoring network would be extendedto include nine sites in the confluence area to monitorthe effect of polders and inundation. The model alsocovers a part of the Thaya basin in Austria and theMyjava basin in Slovakia, and considers handling operationson water reservoirs in the Thaya basin.The Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute (SHMI)has been using the HYDROG model to forecastdischarges in the Myjava basin since 2010, while forecastsfor the Hohenau/Moravský Svätý Ján site startedto be computed in February 2010. The managementof handling operations on polders and on diversionScheme of the consecutive calculation of flow predictions in the Morava River basinSource: CHMI[ 246 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: P. SerclPasanauri meteorological station during the installation of new equipmentand relief installations, including data transmission from PovodíMoravy’s (the Morava River Authority) new instruments, wasincluded in the HYDROG model in February 2011.The algorithm of computing forecasts for the basin’s closing site atHohenau/Moravský Svätý Ján includes the following steps:1. CHMI’s Ostrava Regional Office computes the forecast for theupper Morava basin down to the confluence with the Beva andtransmits the results to CHMI’s Brno Regional Office2. CHMI’s Brno Regional Office runs the calculations for the Thayabasin down to its inflow into the Nové Mlýny Reservoir and for theMorava basin (from the confluence with Beva to the Strážnice site)3. SHMI computes the forecast of discharge for the Šaštín-Strážeclosing site in the Myjava basin (there is an opportunity torun substitute calculations at the Brno Regional Office) andtransmits the results to CHMI’s Brno Regional Office4. Povodí Moravy transmits the data from the automaticmonitoring network in the confluence area and data fromthe Nové Mlýny Reservoir, including the evaluated expected48-hour run-off, to CHMI’s Brno Regional Office5. CHMI’s Brno Regional Office computes the forecast ofdischarge for the Hohenau/Moravský Svätý Ján site6. The results are transmitted to Lower Austria’s hydrologydepartment and SHMI in Bratislava through the file transferprotocol server by 10.00am7. Hydraulic calculations for the Morava, between Hohenau and itsinflow into the Danube, are run by the Austrian side.Part of the system entails the direct online transmission of measuredmeteorological and hydrological data from measuring stationsbetween CHMI and its Austrian colleagues.International development activitiesThe Czech Republic’s international development cooperation contributesto the development of a system of early warning against floods inMoldova and Georgia. In 2011, the Enhanced Preparedness of Georgiaagainst Extreme Weather Events project was launched. This project,which the Czech Development Agency is carrying out in cooperationwith the Georgia National Environmental Agency (NEA) and CHMI,pursues the objective of building a monitoring system for early floodwarning. Among other things, the project will help toimplement an integrated monitoring system using hydrologicaland meteorological stations.The project transfers the Czech Republic’s experiencewith early flood warning and weather forecasting in acomprehensive system, including data collection (supplyof eight automatic water gauging stations, five widelyfeatured automatic meteorological stations and threeautomatic meteorological measuring posts) and evaluation(supply of specific software for data quality checksand the processing of climatologic and hydrologicaldata). It significantly contributes to Georgia’s preparednessfor extreme weather changes through an expansionand modernization of NEA’s meteorological and hydrologicalmonitoring network. Its added value is knowledgetransfer from the Czech Republic, which is guaranteedby CHMI’s participation in some of the project activities.This knowledge transfer is especially valuable for the useof a relational database for meteorology and hydrology.The main output of the project is NEA’s strengthenedcapacity in the area of forecasting meteorologicaland hydrological threats in Georgia, in order to reduceor mitigate the negative impacts of such disasters.The strengthening of NEA’s capacity primarily entailsincreasing the number of monitoring points, whichwill result in continuous flows of updated and reliabledata. The project will also make it possible to store andanalyse this data, which will support early preparationof accurate forecasts and warnings.Cooperation for the futureThe Czech Republic is situated in the head waters ofthree major European rivers: the Danube, the Elbe andthe Oder. It naturally determines methods and activitiesin flood protection and highlights the role of the floodwarning and forecasting service. As the water quicklyflows downstream and across the borders betweenmunicipalities and nations, cooperation is the key toprotecting human lives and property.[ 247 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONWetland cooperation is taking care of waterTobias Salathé, Senior Advisor, Ramsar Convention SecretariatIn the 1960s, when the international environmental movementstarted to take shape, it focused as a priority on landscapesthat are fundamental regulators of water regimes. To supportthis focus, and to streamline the public awareness, the expertcommunity created a new term: ‘wetlands’. A single name to focuson the essence of all water-related ecological systems, naturaland human-made, an obvious term to subsume important landscapesknown as swamps and marshes, lakes and rivers, wetgrasslands, fens, bogs and other types of peatlands, undergroundand karst aquifers, oases, estuaries, deltas and tidal flats, nearshoremarine areas, mangroves and coral reefs, human-made fishponds, rice paddies, reservoirs and salt pans.The understanding of the basic hydrological functions of suchwetlands was crucial to acknowledge the fundamental truth thatour human societies depend on our natural environment, and thatit is wetlands which fulfil the fundamental ecological functions inthis context, notably as regulators of water regimes and as habitatssupporting many characteristic species of flora andfauna. In the early 1970s, UNESCO launched a worldwidecampaign on the wetlands’ ‘liquid assets’ puttingfor the first time into the spotlight their great economic,cultural, scientific and recreational value, the loss ofwhich would be irreparable.Migratory bird experts were among the first torealise the functional connectivity between individualwetland ecosystems, often aligned along river courses,and forming together a system of stepping stones acrossentire countries and continents. Swan, geese and duckmigrations along their major wetland flyways, traditionallyknown by waterfowl hunters, and just about tobe analysed and understood by the first generation ofenvironmentalists, provided the economic and scientificdrivers for the initial focus on wetlands duringthe 1960s. This scientific and technical support wasso substantial that it convinced the politicians andImage: T.Salathé/RamsarExperts visit a floodplain restoration area in Germany where the Kander river enters the Rhine, part of the Transboundary Ramsar Site ‘Oberrhein’[ 248 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONeventually led to the establishment of the first modern environmentalcooperation treaty. Eighteen countries sent their plenipotentiarygovernmental delegations to an international conference in theIranian seaside resort of Ramsar, at the shores of the Caspian Sea(itself a globally important wetland), to sign an intergovernmentaltext, based on the shared confidence that far-sighted national policiesand coordinated international action are needed to maintainand to manage in a sustainable way these important ecologicalsystems that were longtime neglected, drained and destroyed. Thenew treaty with a global reach, signed in Ramsar on 3 February1971 was the first of its kind. It is since colloquially known as the‘Ramsar Convention on Wetlands’. Today, it is rapidly reachingits full global coverage. Already, its member states have togetherlisted more than 2100 ‘Wetlands of International Importance’ (alsoknown as Ramsar Sites), in more than 165 countries, and coveringtogether well beyond 200 million hectares. The Ramsar Sites formthe largest network of protected areas across the globe.Wetlands are the earth’s natural water infrastructure. They providea clean source and store of freshwater, thus assuring the securityof water supply in dry regions and during drought seasons, whileinversely also mitigating flood and storm damage through their waterretention capacities. During the international year of water cooperation,the message on World Wetlands Day (2 February 2013) wasclear: wetlands take care of water – they provide the natural infrastructureto capture, filter, store, transport and release water. Wetlandsare the critical arteries in the water cycle, the hydrological cycle thatkeeps human societies supplied with water. Rain evaporates rapidlyand returns back into the atmosphere, as long as it is not soaked upin fertile soils, feeds underground aquifers and finishes insprings or is stored in all sorts of wetland types. Almosteverywhere, our drinking water resources are deliveredthrough wetlands. And our local communities, as wellas urban societies, profit from specific wetland ecosystemservices, such as water purification, retention andrelease, and the production of wetland food, fish andfibre. Wetlands help with erosion control and sedimenttransport, thereby contributing to land formation andincreasing resilience to storms. The final Rio+20 declarationon ‘the future we want’, clearly recognizes the roleof ecosystems in the supply of water and its quality.The Ramsar Convention in particular encourages andobliges its member states to cooperate when it comesto wetlands and river basins that are shared betweenneighbouring countries, concerning shared species thatmigrate from one country to the next, and concerningdevelopment projects that might affect wetlands in aneighbouring or third country. The Ramsar Conventioncreated and continues to support the global concernand the recognition of a shared responsibility for theseecosystems that provide us with multiple benefits forlarge cities as well as rural communities. Over the years,the Convention has elaborated operational tools on howto integrate wetland site management for the benefitof the functioning of specific ecosystems within broadscaleenvironmental planning at the scales of entireriver basins and coastal areas. Tools designed to clarifyImage: T.Salathé/RamsarConfluence of the Morava with the Danube seen from Devin castle, Slovakia, part of the Transboundary Ramsar Site ‘Floodplains of the Morava-Dyje-Danube confluence’[ 249 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: T.Salathé/RamsarA view of the Romanian section of the Danube Delta, part of a potential Transboundary Ramsar Site shared between Moldova, Romania and Ukrainethe sustainable development objectives of different stakeholders,to identify the ecological, economic and social factors that affect,or may affect, a given site, tools to resolve conflicts, and to obtainresources to find sustainable solutions.Where wetlands and their water catchment basins are shared betweendifferent countries, or different administrative areas, cooperation forthe long-term use of their resources at a transboundary level, takingthe needs of the entire ecosystem and water catchment into account,is an urgent need. And such cooperation is a process that develops,often passing different steps that may individually take much time tobe achieved, in order to move on to the next level of integration andcoordinated action. Local non-governmental stakeholder organizationsare often among the first ones to understand the need for commonapproaches and coordinated action, and to make the first moves.Ideally they will do so with the support of local authorities, enablingthe creation of the first formal contacts across artificial borders. Thisshould lead to regular consultations, agreements on cooperation, andjoint activities. The next steps of integration proposed in the Ramsarguidance are joint planning exercises and the elaboration of commonmanagement plans and interventions. Eventually, shared sites andcatchment basins would be administered jointly by the respectiveinstitutions in charge in each country concerned.Real life experience shows the most challenging initial factors tobe the need to create trust, mutual trust among the neighbours andthe different administrations concerned. Confidence and trust amongthe partners, the vision and belief that together, they can identifyshared and common vital interests, and at the same time acknowledgingthat there can easily be potentially harmful side effects andconsequences, created through activities that supportonly unilateral interests. As well as political vision andwill, transboundary cooperation needs dedicated staff,sufficient time and patience. One of the primary needsis to find a common language. Speaking literally aboutthe same idiom, but also in terms of expressions thatneed to be understood in the same sense by stakeholdersand geographical neighbours who have possiblyvery differing backgrounds and individual histories.Information and data, as well as their analyses, need tobe shared in a transparent way. This is likely to triggerand to be followed by common monitoring and researchprogrammes. Hopefully, these are benefiting from apragmatic exchange of equipment and services. Suchexchange can lead to the joint development of rulesand responsibilities, including joint management plans.Undertaking joint training, regular exchange of staff anddisseminating concrete experiences rapidly increasesthe know-how and intervention capacities, notably attransboundary level. In this way, mutual benefits can beachieved and be recognized more widely. The disseminationof best case and other success stories benefits theraising of awareness and implementation capacities.On the European continent – where many, oftensmaller, countries meet in a restricted continental space– national borders are abundant. This can result in thesplitting of functional water catchment basins and individualwetland sites into two artificial entities, which[ 250 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: T.Salathé/RamsarImage: T.Salathé/RamsarDrainage canal in the Slovak floodplain of the Morava, part of the TransboundaryRamsar Site ‘Floodplains of the Morava-Dyje-Danube confluence’An oxbow of the Rhine in France’s Petite Camargue Alsacienne, partof the Transboundary Ramsar Site ‘Rhin supérieur’makes improvements difficult. Ramsar partners have thereforefocused on improving the situation by gathering substantive experience,working across administrative and political borders, in Europe.Many wetland ecosystems are shared between several countries, yetout of the more than 2,100 Ramsar Sites at global level, only 13 areformally declared as Transboundary Ramsar Sites so far. With theexception of a stretch of the Senegal river, shared between Senegaland Gambia, all Transboundary Ramsar Sites are situated in Europe,covering shared rivers and their floodplains, shared karst areas, extensivebogs, often spreading across the watershed divide, such as inthe Giant mountains, that divide the Polish and Czech catchmentsof major rivers such as the Elbe and Odra which take their sourcein this area. Transboundary wetland and water cooperation is moreadvanced in heavily used and densely settled floodplain areas of theRhine and Danube. Between Germany and France along the UpperRhine between Basel and Karlsruhe, and between Austria, Slovakiaand the Czech Republic in the floodplains along the Danube-Morava-Dyje confluence, between the cities of Vienna, Bratislava and Brno.In 2002, a tri-national non-governmental initiative for theMorava-Dyje floodplains, jointly launched at the end of the twentiethcentury by the expert organizations of Daphne (Slovakia),Distelverein (Austria), Veronica (Czech Republic) and WWF’sDanube-Carpathian programme, won the prestigious RamsarWetland Conservation Award. The award recognized the incentivework of the private organizations for cooperation towards sustainabledevelopment and biodiversity conservation in a formerly isolatedpolitical border area. An area that was until recently cut in twoby the ‘Iron Curtain’ with trip-wires and mine fields that separatedwestern market economies from the eastern communistplanning zone during a large period of the twentiethcentury. The scientific inventories and the ecosystemrestoration work undertaken by the award winning notfor-profitorganizations paid off and convinced the localand national authorities in the three countries to cometogether, and to formally sign a declaration of cooperationat a ceremony in the prestigious Zidlochovicecastle, a former hunting estate of the Austro-Hungarianempire, located in the midst of the periodically floodedriver meadows and ancient oak forests. Over the lastten years, the ministerial declaration was translatedinto a common, trilateral management plan for a riverfloodplain, centrally located in Europe. Regular coordinationmeetings make sure that the natural assetsand ecosystem functions of the area are maintainedand restored wherever possible. The floodplains arenow at a crossroads, due to the prospect of developmentinfrastructure projects for continent-wide rivertransport, renewable electricity production (water andwind), and main road and railway arteries for continentaltrade routes. This will present a serious challengefor maintaining and restoring sufficient natural wetlandecosystem and floodplain areas, in order that thehuman-managed ecosystems can continue to provideeffective and low-cost services, such as flood retention,water purification, drinking water supply, timber, food,biodiversity production and others.[ 251 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONBetter late than neverDr Claudine Brelet, HDRThe Oxford English Dictionary defines the word ‘cooperation’as “working or acting together to the same end” fora common purpose or benefit. Unfortunately, this processdoes not always take into account all the cultures involvedor what it means for them, whatever virtuous intentions areproclaimed. Who can say that most international cooperationprojects to ensure sustainability and poverty eradication respectlocal cultural practices and values?Polyomyelitis and cholera are among the pathogens caused by inappropriatesanitation measuresImage: C. BreletIn the water sector, the approach is still too often based only onhydrological and climatological data, on modelling and engineering,all relying on the application of scientific and mathematicalprinciples to practical ends such as the design, manufacture andoperation of efficient and economical structures, machines,processes and systems. Economy, too, is not sufficient to understandcultural practices linked to water. Howeverbrilliantly designed international cooperation waterprojects are, too many have eventually failed to meetthe tangible and intangible needs of local communitieson a long-term basis because they did not integratecultural practices linked to water.Integration means the participation and involvementof all individuals, especially the poor, from thebeginning of a project’s planning process to its management,monitoring and maintenance. Achieving trueintegration entails valuing the experiences, knowledgeand narratives of women and men who live with andbecause of water. Integration also means transparency:access to clear information is necessary to ensure thatlocal communities can understand the changes theymay have to face in their traditional lifestyles. It canalso ensure that one interested party will not disadvantageothers. It is easy to publish figures and numbers,but these fail to ensure that a project is successfullyintegrated because they do not take into account livinghuman reality, especially its intangible dimensions. Acommon challenge for experts is to translate scientificterms and concepts in a way that is understandable tocivil society, especially when communities have a lifestylethat relies on beliefs that largely differ from thoseof modern science.The modern scientific paradigm does not take intoaccount the way populations view themselves, theirown paradigm or ‘cosmovision’ that gives a meaningto their place in the universe and in nature – inshort, their culture. Too often, international expertsforget that the term ‘culture’ does not mean the literaryand artistic achievements of ‘cultured’ elites only.Culture involves the social, spiritual and technologicaldimensions of human life, learned patterns ofbehaviour, thought, normative values, knowledge– namely a way of life – which for generations havebeen shared by the members of a society to meetits basic tangible and intangible needs. The WorldConference on Cultural Policies 1 adopted the celebratedanthropological definition of culture that linksit so irrevocably to development. According to thisdefinition, culture is “the whole complex of distinctivespiritual, material, intellectual and emotionalfeatures that characterize a society or social group.It includes not only arts and letters, but also modesof life, the fundamental rights of the human being,value systems, traditions and beliefs.”[ 252 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONImage: C. BreletBroken modern pipes create a health hazard for local populationsAnthropology is unique among social and human sciences becauseits transdisciplinary, systemic and cybernetic approach does notonly include history, oral literature and linguistics. It also embracesall the components and processes of social life – the physical environment,systems of production, technological knowledge and tools,family patterns, the political system, religious customs and symbols,and artistic activities. And it highlights the interconnectedness andinteractions of the multiple aspects of culture. Hence anthropologyoffers a unified framework, both theoretical and practical, based onthe premise that biological needs and material constraints, such asthe environment and technology, are primary forces in the evolutionof sociocultural systems. Focusing on the interaction betweenthe biological and cultural environments of a community canhelp to reduce many social problems and impacts when a systemand/or technology of water distribution has to be transformed orreplaced by more effective ones. This is especially important whennew management, laws and economic regulations would inevitablyimpact a community’s social organization, affect sensitive issuessuch as social inequality, sexism and gender equity, exploitation,poverty and underdevelopment, and generate new patterns ofdomestic organization and even new political institutions.Anthropologists collect and organize cultural data in relation torecurrent aspects or parts of local sociocultural systems in orderto compare a local culture with the ‘modern’ one.Distinguishing between local views and interpretationand those of the water professionals is not only useful inensuring that an international water cooperation projectwill be locally appropriate; it can also avoid ethnocentrism,a common human tendency generally leading tothe conclusion that traditional cultures are inferior tothe ‘modern’ one. For example, an ethnocentric attitudewould condemn as counterproductive the Hindutaboo against cattle slaughter whereas it has positiveeffects on agricultural productivity in India. In thesame manner, understanding the family structure, thedomestic division of labour and education, roles relatedto age and gender and domestic hierarchies, helps tobuild an understanding of how basic production andconsumption within a community – all activities thatwould not be possible without water – are organized.Because domestic economy relies on water, all thesefactors have a serious impact on the ways that waterresources are allocated and used.The observation of living reality greatly contributes toimproving a water and sanitation project. To this effectand at the request of Professor Szollozi-Nagy, then[ 253 ]
WATER COOPERATION, SUSTAINABILITY AND POVERTY ERADICATIONDjenné’s stylish Sudanese architecture includes dry toilets in cabins on the roofterraces of housesdirector of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO) division of water sciences, I designedthe concept of an international and interactive electronic networkopen both to water and anthropology professionals. The resultingNetwork of Water Anthropology (NETWA) was endorsed inJune 2002 by the 6th Programme of the International HydrologicalProgramme to fit into its proposed new paradigm and themes.The paradigm was based on the integration of culture, in its broadmeaning, in water sciences and their practical applications, withthemes including Water and Society; Water, Civilization and Ethics;Water Education and Building Local Capacities; and particularlyInstitutional Development and Creation of Networks for WaterEducation and Training. I presented the framework during thethird World Water Forum in Kyoto in 2003, in the session titledTranslating the Cultural Dimension of Water into Action, andduring the fourth World Water Forum in Mexico, 2006, focused onLocal Actions for a Global Challenge. 2When I was assigned to go to Mali as a UNESCO Senior Expertconsultant, working in the frame of World Heritage, ProfessorSzollozi-Nagy thought it appropriate to root the NETWA projectin this Sahelian country. Mali is one of the poorest countries in theworld; it also faces the cruel impacts of climatic change, droughts andfloods affecting local people’s health and resources. A few decades ago,the Niger river had made Mali the storehouse of West Africa for cereal,fish, rice and meat, but today it barely feeds its own. Today, the riveris collapsing under the weight of human action and natural effects.Riverside societies survive thanks to internal and external migration.Those staying on its banks try to adapt to climate change through thediversification of their activities (for example, choosing agricultureover commerce). The Dean of the Faculty of Literature, Languages andImage: C. BreletSocial and Human Sciences at the University of Bamako,Dr Salif Berthe, enthusiastically welcomed the NETWAproject 3 and mobilized human and material resources toopen a research centre on Water Anthropology as earlyas February 2008, with the goal of promoting the culturalpractices of the Niger riverside societies. 4In some places, the explosive growth of main waterand sewage systems designed by some internationalcooperation projects has not improved local communities’health and well-being. Mali is a region wheremore than three quarters of the population live belowthe poverty line and literacy and healthcare indices areamong the worst in the world. The two-storey houses ofthe city of Djenné (listed as a UNESCO World HeritageSite in 2005) are built exclusively of mud bricks 5 andtheir stylish Sudanese architecture includes dry toiletsin cabins on roof terraces, usually on the second floors.The excreta are stored in pipes built along a parapetwall, covered with the same mixture of laterite mud andorganic material which is oil-soaked to increase tensilestrength and render the roofs impermeable. This is thesame material used to coat the walls of the houses.In this semi-arid area, with low annual precipitationand dry seasons lasting for 8-11 months a year,temperatures can reach more than 40° C and are rarelybelow 32° C. About every 20 years, the dry toilet wall isopened and its contents collected and used as compostin the fields. In the same way that solar radiation is usedfor disinfecting water, and recommended by the WorldHealth Organization as a viable method for householdwater treatment and safe storage, this traditional sanitationtechnology uses cumulative solar energy that canraise the temperature far above 50° C inside the storingpipe, thus destroying the cell structures of bacteria. Bynot ejecting excreta in the streets, the system limitsfaecal contamination in the city.A scientific study of the technology, involving thelocal masson masters and aimed at scientifically updatingthis traditional sanitation system, would have avoidedvarious inappropriate sanitation measures that have beenused – the open channels for the disposal of wastewaterand rainwater, and the easily breakable modern pipesand collector lids designed by ‘North’s experts’ alone.Deeper channels are traps into which infants, ageingpeople and cattle fall, and some drown. All have been thedirect cause of numerous avoidable pathogens in the city,namely in ascending order (according to the local healthcentre): malaria, diarrhoea, leptospirosis (rats feedingin the accumulation of waste) and cholera, which peakwhen the channels overflow during the rainy season –not to mention the harmattan winds that carry germsthat spread eye infections, colds and meningitis, and ascarcity of labour that is badly needed to meet the localcommunity’s basic needs.Let us hope that Mali will soon regain its traditionalpeace and that the installation of new water and sanitationsystems as planned by the Aga Khan Trust forCulture will restore Djenné’s cultural splendour. Betterlate than never.[ 254 ]
VIIEconomic Developmentand Water
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERWater cooperation for sustainable utilization:Lake Naivasha, KenyaProfessor David M. Harper, Dr Nic Pacini, Dr Caroline Upton, Dr Ed H. J. Morrison, Mr Richard Fox, and Mr Enock KimintaFresh waters around the world are critical for human welfareyet widely degraded. Lake Naivasha is the world centre forirrigated cut flowers, accounting for over 70 per cent ofKenya’s flower exports (US$400 million) and 3 per cent of its grossdomestic product. Some 5 km 2 of commercial farms are irrigatedfrom lake and groundwater, supplying 40 per cent of the EuropeanUnion market, 25 per cent of which is direct to UK supermarkets.Lake Naivasha and its basinLake Naivasha is the most well-known freshwater resource in Kenyaafter Lake Victoria, because the land around it was subdivided earlyin colonial history and sold to settlers unlike the other freshwaterlake, Baringo, which has remained as government land occupied bythree indigenous communities. Naivasha has long been famous forits aquatic bird diversity, and is popular with residents of Nairobifor weekend escapes and tourists on their way to major destinationssuch as the Maasai Mara National Reserve. Mid-twentieth centurytourist guidebooks describe it as ‘one of the world’s top 10 birdwatchingsites’ and ‘the most beautiful of the Rift Valley lakes’. Suchabbreviated descriptions barely do justice to an ecosystem once asspectacular as this.Anthropogenic changes in the twentieth centuryA commercial fishery was opened in the lake in the secondhalf of the twentieth century after several earlier introductionsof piscivorous American large-mouthed bass andherbivorous East African native Tilapia species. The formeris believed to have exterminated the only native species, asmall endemic tooth-carp, by the 1960s, representing thefirst detectable impact on the lake’s ecology by humans.By the time this endemic fish had disappeared, the firstof several exotic species had arrived by chance. A floatingfern originally from South Africa, named ‘Kariba Weed’because of its dramatic impact on the Kariba reservoir onthe Zambezi, was recorded in the shallow lagoons in the1960s. The exotic with worst impact of all, the LouisianaCrayfish, was deliberately introduced in 1970 by theFisheries Department to diversify the commercial fishery.It ate every native species, plant or animal, beneath thewater surface that could not escape by swimming. Thefishery for it, which exported to Europe, collapsed afterabout six years and has never recovered. The WaterHyacinth, a flowering floating plant also from SouthImage: Nic PaciniWater Ambassadors training on lake ecology at Lake Oloidien, an alkaline lake supporting lesser flamingoes beside Lake Naivasha[ 256 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERAmerica, arrived in 1988. It thrived because it had no competition fromnative plants, particularly the Blue Water Lily that had disappeared.The nature of agriculture around the lake began to change after1975. By 1995, small farms had given way to several square kilometresof irrigated horticulture in large units, with output (flowersand vegetables) air-freighted to Europe. The cultivated area haddoubled by the start of the twenty-first century, and this land usechange brought a tenfold rise in the population of horticulturalestate workers and their dependents, to 250,000.The most significant impact of this growing agricultural intensificationwas the abstraction of water from the lake, groundwaterand rivers. No doubt, smallholder use of water higher in the catchmentalso increased, but this was ‘invisible’ to journalists and othervisitors. Scientific studies in the 1990s showed the abstractionsfrom the catchment to result in fluctuations of the lake 2-3 metresbelow its natural levels. The most visible and ecologically damagingconsequence of this was the disappearance of the fringing papyrusaround the lake. Stranded on dry land, large animals like buffalo andcattle were able to knock down the plants’ heads and eat them. Thetracks they made enabled smaller animals to follow and graze anyregrowth, so the swamps were progressively eliminated.The loss of the fringing swamps meant that the incoming rivers,heavy with sediment from inappropriate farming upstream,discharged their load directly into the lake instead turning it intonew swamp plant growth which would release nutrients slowly. Itbecame clear that the lake – browner in colour, with floating matsof exotic plants and an edge no longer protected by papyrus – wasin urgent need of careful management and restoration.Stumbling conservation initiativesAs the century drew to a close, the most important issue for Naivashawas the increasing water use by the rapidly-growing industry ofcommercial flower and vegetable farming for export. Demand forfresh water was intense, not only for intensive horticultural irriga-tion (about two thirds of the demand), but also in theOlkaria Geothermal Power Station, which generatesaround 15 per cent of Kenya’s power and is the largestsingle user of lake water.It was widely believed that the lake was over-abstractedbecause by the middle of the first decade of this century,there was no overall monitoring of abstractions –although the major commercial abstractions, beingimportant sources of revenue for the Water ResourceManagement Authority (WRMA), were subject to scrutiny.While the Government of Kenya had created aNational Environmental Management Authority under the1999 Environmental Management and Coordination Act,and the WRMA through the 2002 Water Act, enforcementof regulations proved to be weak. Fuelled by media articlesin Kenya and the UK, conservation agencies and thepublic perceived two growing threats to the lake and itsbiodiversity: human population growth leading to physicalpressure on the shores, and untreated wastewater flowinginto the lake from industries and settlements.The Lake Naivasha Riparian Association (LNRA), thegroup representing lakeside landowners, had produced aManagement Plan, which formed the basis of the declarationof the site as a Ramsar Wetland of InternationalImportance, in 1995. This Plan was approved by theKenyan Government and officially gazetted in 2004under the 1999 Environment Act, resulting in the formationof a dedicated management committee. However,many people (including pastoralists, smallholder farmersand residents of Naivasha’s informal settlements), whoselivelihoods depend on the ecosystem services of the lake,were excluded from the consultation process and fromrepresentation on the committee. A temporary coalitionof pastoralists lodged a successful court injunction againstImage:Nic PaciniDistributing trees to farmers, who are encouraged to grow trees and terrace their land to arrest erosion[ 257 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERthe plan and members of LNRA, on the grounds that they did not representthe interests of all stakeholders, and it was stalled just as it becameapparent that the lake was continuing to deteriorate. Evidence of itsecosystem disruption by exotic species and loss of papyrus was alreadyclear, but now its eutrophication – enrichment – by the combinedimpacts of soil erosion from catchment smallholder cultivations, nutrientrun-off from lakeside farms, and the impact of thousands of peopleliving without sanitation within a mile of the lake’s edge, was madeobvious by cyclical blooms of noxious blue-green algae.Strengthening water cooperationThe first organization to take a positive initiative towards sustainablemanagement of the lake in the new century – reviving watercooperation – was the Lake Naivasha Growers Group (LNGG),consisting of the major horticultural companies, some of whomwere also members of LNRA. LNGG commissioned consultants toconduct an accurate water balance, which could form the basis ofa sustainable abstraction policy. By this time it was known that the2002 Water Act would soon become law, so the policy could bedeveloped under this and not the stalled Management Plan.The Water Act, implemented in 2005, was the country’s firstlegislation to enable community participation since independencein 1963. It established a new authority, WRMA, with sevenbasins within Kenya. WRMA was charged with establishing WaterResource User Associations (WRUAs), to comprise all ‘legitimatestakeholders’ for subcatchments within these basins. The catchmentof Lake Naivasha is within the Rift Valley basin with 12 WRUAs, themost advanced of which is the Lake Naivasha WRUA (LaNaWRUA),due to the history of moves to achieve sustainable use of the lake.LaNaWRUA was registered as a society in June 2007 and elected itsfirst officials in October; in 2008 it signed a memorandum of understandingwith WRMA to promote sustainable water managementin the catchment; in April 2009 it submitted a Water AllocationPlan and Sub-Catchment Management Plan (SCMP) based on thecommissioned hydrological study.A floating island planted with papyrus at the wastewater lagoon of one ofFinlays’ flower farmsImage: David M. HarperWRUAs are open to membership of any water user whohas or should have a permit for extraction. LaNaWRUAhas six categories of water users – individuals, waterservice providers, tourist operators, irrigators (dividedinto groundwater and surface water), commercial users(such as fish farming, power generation), and pastoralists.The executive committee consists of two representativesfrom each category, elected by category members.LaNaWRUA has non-user members, called ObserverMembers, without voting rights. LaNaWRUA recognizesa wide range of stakeholders and seeks to enrol them inlocal environmental management. It recently prepared anSCMP which lists 42 stakeholders represented by otherWRUAs. These were slower to become constituted thanLaNaWRUA, but by 2010 all were in operation, beingguided under an ‘umbrella’ of all WRUAs, by Naivasha.Over the same period, LNGG began to develop aPayment for Ecosystem Services (PES) project. This wasoriginally conceived as a means of restoring the papyrusthat had been destroyed around the lake, so that thegrowers would have a clear link between their paymentsand the ecosystem service they were restoring. It waslater developed into payments for upper catchmentsmall farmers at the foot of the Aberdare mountains,who were thus encouraged to grow trees and terracetheir land to arrest erosion. The scheme has provedsuccessful with the farmers, who have developed alternativelivelihood streams as well as holding back theirsoils, but it has not been possible to measure any subsequentimprovements in the river or lake waters.Water cooperation blossomsDuring these developments, Kenya experienced aprolonged drought. Between mid-2007 and the end of2009 the water levels of Lake Naivasha dropped almost3 metres, to a level that had not been experienced since1946. This aroused international concern from themedia, irrigators, the customers of the cut flower producersand their governments. The WRUAs were too youngand inexperienced to respond with the required rapidity,but three series of events were unfolding that helpedthem to manage the crisis and come out stronger.Firstly, organizations alarmed by news coverage suchas European governments and international non-governmentalorganizations like the World Wide Fund forNature (WWF), were encouraged to contribute to individualaspects of the solution. WWF and LNGG fundedLaNaWRUA to complete the first ever basin-wide surveyof water abstractors, which found that almost 97 per centwere either unlicensed or their licences had expired. Allthe WRUAs, as agents for WRMA, began registeringabstractors and collecting their licence fees. LaNaWRUAorganized and agreed with abstractors, through the otherWRUAs, a ‘traffic lights’ system of lake water use: at thered level all abstraction ceased; at amber, abstraction wasreduced; and at green, abstractions could continue to thelevel that the licence allowed.Secondly, in early 2010 Kenyan Prime Minister RailaOdinga talked with HRH the Prince of Wales at an inter-[ 258 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERnational conference on climate change and asked if he could help. Staffof the Prince of Wales’s International Sustainability Unit then madea field visit and a rapid environmental and economic appraisal of thecatchment, which stimulated the creation of a new management organizationby the Government of Kenya, called Imarisha Naivasha. In 2012Imarisha produced its Sustainable Development Action Plan (SDAP)2012-17, requiring the development of a monitoring programme forlake health and a database of information to support the “enablingconditions for effective water regulation and governance, sustainableland and natural resource use and sustainable development in the lakeNaivasha Basin”.The third series of events came from European retailers – thedirect buyers of cut flowers – who began to fund small projectsthat would act as demonstration successes, to be repeated across thecatchment as Imarisha and the initial PES grew to facilitate catchment-widesustainability. Some of these ‘early wins’ were projectsfrom UK retailers and Dutch and Swedish governments, fundedthrough Imarisha. Others were directly funded by two Europeanretailers that prize their commitment to sustainability – the GermanREWE Group and Swiss Coop – through the universities ofLeicester and Nairobi. These universities have the longest-runningresearch partnership at Lake Naivasha, since 1982, which has beenresponsible for most of the ecological understanding of the lakedescribed above.The Coop-funded project, entitled ‘Sustainable Roses and Water’,focused on promoting water efficiency among users and trainingthem to recognize it as a finite resource. The central part of this hasbeen two kinds of five-day residential training camps for horticulturalworkforce officials, WRUA committee members and membersof self-help groups (SHGs) that are also being assisted by the physicaldemonstration projects.The first kind of training camp has been for ‘Water Ambassadors’,where people are taught about the water cycle from global to local scales,about cleaning wastewater for environmental acceptability, purifyingraw water for domestic use and about the ecology of Lake Naivasha.Teacher Josphat Macharia training Water Friendly FarmersImage: Nic PaciniThe second kind has been for ‘Water Friendly Farmers’,teaching people to farm in the semi-arid conditions ofmuch of the basin, using water harvesting techniques forcrops and drinking, self-sufficiency of livestock keepingand waste reuse. This latter training has been undertakenby a teacher, Josphat Macharia, on his 5-acre plot thatsustains his extended family with much output to spare.It has been calculated that his land can feed 30 people and,as such, his methods provide a clear beacon for future landmanagement in the face of increased pressure from climatechange. Trainees have undertaken to go home and furthertrain another 10 people each in their workplace, homelocation or church community.The training camps have also supported members ofSHGs that were in receipt of physical improvements.These have taken the themes of erosion control, waterefficiency and water quality. Erosion control projectshave built dams in dry gullies that experience flash floodsto hold back sediment from entering the lake, and introducedtree-planting schemes on steep land in headwaters.Water efficiency projects have provided water harvestingfor schools where the teachers and governors have agreedto create vegetable plots and tree nurseries with the children.They have also targeted SHGs growing vegetableswhere water is in limited supply, such as a pan dam for awomen’s group that leases and farms 10 acres of arid landand a youth group that built its own greenhouse but couldonly access water from streams far away. Water qualityprojects have provided cleaner water for collection fromdams in an innovative way that also provides biodiversityrestoration, funded through the REWE Group.The REWE Group project, ‘Papyrus Restoration’,focuses on projects that restore the papyrus fringe aroundLake Naivasha. Artificial islands are being planted onshorein ponds with papyrus. When established, these will beanchored offshore in selected locations, to spread andgrow into an established swamp to protect the lake fromsediment and enhance fish growth and reproduction.Restoration in the catchment is focused on a few of themany artificial dams left over from colonial farming, nowin disrepair. Projects have assisted SHGs with fencing andbuilding materials; the groups have erected the fencing,strengthened the dams and built cattle drinking troughswith water taps below the dams. The communities thatsurround the dams can now access water no longercontaminated by cattle and cleaned by the natural wetlandplants that had been eliminated by grazing or trampling.Water cooperation in the futureBy the middle of 2013, all the initiatives designed tounite water users in the Naivasha basin are bearing fruit;although each action is small, they are like a pebble in apond, spreading ripples ever outward. There is an enormousamount still to do, to achieve a sustainable basinwith inhabitants no longer in poverty. Imarisha’s SDAPvision – “A clean, healthy and productive environmentand sustainable livelihoods in the Lake Naivasha basinfor the benefit of the present and future generations”– is at the beginning of a long road to achievement.[ 259 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERSecuring Australia’s groundwater futureProfessor Craig T. Simmons, Director, National Centre for Groundwater Research and Training, Australia;and Neil Power, Director, State Research Coordination, Goyder Institute for Water Research, South AustraliaTo many outsiders Australia is a land of surf and sundrenchedbeaches. But venture a short way inland and itis mostly semi-arid and desert, a land mass where droughtis all too common and water is an extremely valuable commodity.To prosper in such a parched and unforgiving environment, thenation has become increasingly reliant on groundwater. From alargely untapped resource 40 years ago, groundwater is now the lifebloodof communities and key to economic development for largeparts of the country. An estimate widely accepted by scientists andpolicymakers is that groundwater now directly supplies more than30 per cent of the nation’s consumptive use.Access to such low-cost, good quality water has delivered massivesocial and economic benefits, allowing industry and urban andregional centres to flourish. Without it, agriculture and miningwould struggle, numerous rural towns and cities such as Perth,Newcastle and Alice Springs would lose their main water source,and countless dependent ecosystems would perish.Managing the impact of this rapid increase in extraction andsecuring the long-term future of the resource for all users isGroundwater use in Australia as a percentage of total water use inkey catchments across the countrySource: Australian Water Resources Council/CSIROhighly complex and challenging. It involves manycompeting interests – community, industrial andenvironmental – as well as federal, state and locallevels of government.One of the biggest challenges is to manage thecumulative environmental impact of multiple actionson the baseflow of rivers, springs, wetlands and othergroundwater-dependent ecosystems. The uncertainty ofclimate change and climate variability is adding anotherlayer of complexity. The concern is that if groundwateris not properly managed, over-development couldresult in the irreversible degradation of aquifers andaffect the reliability of surface water resources. Such ascenario would have significant economic and environmentalramifications.Efforts to better understand and manage groundwaterhave been the subject of various intergovernmentalinitiatives over the past 20 years. These have increasinglyfocused on the need for a coordinated, national response.The most recent initiative – the National GroundwaterAction Plan, which was funded by the AustralianGovernment through the National Water Commission– helped explore knowledge gaps through extensivehydrogeological investigations and assisted in establishingthe National Centre for Groundwater Research andTraining (NCGRT) for large-scale capacity building.While good progress is being made, there is recognitionthat Australia still has some way to go to secureits groundwater future. Recent projects have succeededin developing general tools, baseline assessments andguidelines to improve groundwater management, butthe work started from a relatively low base.Australia still needs to answer critical questions inareas such as the scale of groundwater use and its depletion,the impacts on connected surface water resourcesand the risk of increased salinity posed by high levelsof extraction. Accurately quantifying total groundwateruse is just one side of the ledger; estimating rechargeis even more challenging. The recharge process canbe extremely long-term, sometimes stretching overhundreds of thousands of years.To achieve long-term goals, a new NationalGroundwater Strategic Plan is being developed to guidepolicy and decision makers over the next 10 years. Theplanning process is groundbreaking in that it has soughtinput from all key stakeholders, including water managers,policymakers and researchers across national, state[ 260 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERImage: NCGRTChampagne Springs in the Kimberley region of Western Australia: securing Australia’s groundwater future is a complex challengeand territory jurisdictions. It is a collaborative approach which aimsto capitalize on significant advances already made and providesa strategic vision for groundwater security and sustainability forfuture generations.The plan is expected to be finalized by the end of 2013 and focuseson three priority objectives: sustainable extraction and optimal use,providing investment confidence, and planning and managing nowfor the future. Following endorsement of the National GroundwaterStrategic Plan, state and territory jurisdictions will develop actions tobetter coordinate and improve groundwater management in Australia.A key element of any successful strategic planning programmeis knowledge, and that requires extensive research to build a deepunderstanding of the resource and its many variables. Due to theirunderground nature, groundwater systems are highly complex,which makes sustainable extraction regimes challenging to define.Advancing the science of modelling to better understand andpredict intricate groundwater processes is essential. While modellinghas improved considerably in Australia over the past 10years, there are many technical and policy issues still to address inorder to improve reliability and to find the right balance betweensimplicity and complexity. The development of national modellingguidelines has been an integral part of a coordinated effortto achieve leading practice in groundwater modelling. Futurepriority areas highlighted in the strategic plan include integratingmodelling frameworks to use all available data, andestablishing clear links to inform groundwater planning,policy and management.Targeted investigations and sustained monitoringare also key to understanding hydrogeology andgroundwater flow processes, as well as the connectivityof groundwater systems with other water resources.This in turn requires investment in meters, monitoringand compliance regimes which take into accountthe system’s characteristics, the level of use, potentialdemand and associated levels of risk.There is a degree of urgency in having these measuresin place quickly because demand for groundwatercontinues to increase as Australia’s population grows.Intensive mining development in Australia over the pastdecade, together with the development of new energysources and technologies, has also intensified usage andthe impacts on groundwater resources.The mining and energy sectors are heavily dependenton groundwater as a water source, particularly inarid parts of Australia. They are now also using highsalinitygroundwater through desalination, making useof resources previously considered unusable or of lowbeneficial value.[ 261 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERThere are concerns about the cumulative effect on the GreatArtesian Basin (GAB) and other aquifers from both traditionalmining and the rapid expansion of coal seam gas and geothermalenergy programmes, and planned shale gas mining. These riskshave been recognized nationally, with the Australian Governmentinvesting AU$200 million to fund the Independent Expert ScientificCommittee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development.The committee is charged with delivering scientific advice to decisionmakers on the impact that coal seam gas and large coal miningmay have on Australia’s water resources.The GAB is one of the largest and deepest artesian basins in theworld, stretching over 1.7 million square kilometres and providingthe only reliable source of freshwater throughout much of centraland eastern inland Australia. It is of cultural significance to manyindigenous Australians, and numerous communities and sensitiveecosystems depend on it for survival.While steps have been taken to limit extraction and to improvethe integrity of wells in Australia, adverse impacts can be significantbefore they become apparent. There are concerns that in some casessuch drawdowns may be irreversible in terms of aquifer depletion,water quality degradation and pollution.As Australia searches for new water options to meet increasingdemands, conjunctive use has emerged as a cost-effective alternativeto reduce reliance on traditional water supplies. Groundwater isincreasingly being used in conjunction with surface water and otherwater sources, such as treated stormwater and recycled wastewaters,and as a storage medium through managed aquifer recharge schemes.Such approaches provide increased water supply flexibility andsecurity, particularly during periods of drought. But they also raisequestions about combined management of water sources, whichhave traditionally been managed separately, and issues surroundingwater ownership and water property rights.A further concern arising from the huge increase in groundwateruse in Australia is the impact on the quality of the water. The draftNational Groundwater Strategic Plan highlights a paucity of informationin this area. Increased extraction poses a serious risk to manygroundwater systems due to inter-aquifer leakage or accessions ofmore saline irrigation drainage – issues which should be taken intoaccount when setting sustainable extraction limits.Similarly, seawater intrusion due to a greater demand for freshwater along Australia’s increasingly populated coastal rim is alsoa largely unknown factor. Such scenarios require a much betterbalance between quantity and quality in groundwater hydrology,with learnings embedded in planning and management processes.To support consistent groundwater management across Australia,the Bureau of Meteorology is developing a national information systemto collate and standardize groundwater information. It aims to deliveruniformity in data sets between jurisdictions, with quality informationreadily available to water authorities through a common platform.Access to such data helps underpin good governance and allowsthe development of more efficient regulatory processes for a riskbasedmanagement system. The goal is cost-effective water planningwhich reaches a balance between competing economic, social andenvironmental interests, while protecting the long-term sustainabilityof groundwater systems.It is critical that those who use the resource have clarity in respectof the legal nature of water entitlements, and that the rules and costsgoverning its extraction are transparent and accountable. Waterreforms in Australia since the mid 1990s have resulted in state andterritory jurisdictions moving towards agreed principlesfor water management through legally enforceable plans,but inconsistencies still persist. Further work is nowneeded to better understand the nature of these differences,in order to secure a truly harmonized approach.The adoption of fully integrated developmentapproval systems by jurisdictions will ensure that issuesare addressed holistically between regulatory agencies,providing greater levels of community confidence.This is particularly important where groundwater isconnected to other water resources or dependent environments,and where multiple developments have acumulative impact.With groundwater out of sight and for many outof mind, raising awareness of its value to society, oureconomy and environment is vital to achieving publicacceptance of policies and regulation for better managementand sustainable use. Australia is a land renownedfor long periods of devastating drought followed byintermittent periods of higher rainfall and floods, whenpressure to secure our precious groundwater reservesinevitably eases. But we must not relax our commitment.There is an urgent need to shatter the misconceptionthat groundwater is a more or less unlimited resource.Australia is on track to more than double its water use bymid-century and there are no new big water resources tobe found. It is imperative that as a nation we become farsmarter in the way we manage what we have.Research and trainingSince it was established in 2009 the NCGRT has played a centralrole in expanding Australia’s knowledge of its groundwatersystems. The centre represents a significant investment ingroundwater capacity building through a comprehensive researchand training programme which cuts across disciplines.Headquartered at Flinders University in Adelaide andco-funded by the Australian Research Council and NationalWater Commission, the NCGRT is addressing a national skillsshortage in groundwater expertise through extensive trainingand up-skilling. It currently has about 140 chief investigators,postdoctoral researchers and PhD candidates, and promotesglobal collaboration between nearly 200 Australian andinternational researchers who are undertaking projectsconducted by the centre. Strong collaborative links have beendeveloped with the Commonwealth Scientific and IndustrialResearch Organisation (CSIRO), universities and otherresearch institutions in Australia and overseas, as well as withindustry and government partners.Research at the NCGRT is focused on major nationalgroundwater management issues identified by resourcemanagers and industry, and includes field-based projectsthat deliver research in support of management and policyneeds. The research is grouped into key areas around thecharacteristics of aquifers and aquitards, hydrodynamicsand modelling, surface water and groundwater interactions,and interactions between groundwater, vegetation and theatmosphere. A fifth research stream is investigating the social,economic, legal and policy dimensions of groundwater resourcemanagement, including community attitudes. It provides vitalintegration between social and biophysical research.The NCGRT is a wide-ranging research centre that isinstrumental in helping to shape innovative and effective policyand governance for the sustainable management of Australia’sgroundwater future.[ 262 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERAdvancing sustainable groundwater managementin Abu Dhabi, United Arab EmiratesDr Mohamed Yousef Al Madfaei, Executive Director, Integrated Environmental Policy and Planning Sector;Eva Ramos, Director, Environmental Analysis and Economics; and Hessa Abdelsattar Banijabir,Environmental Analyst, Environment Agency-Abu DhabiDespite being one of the richest countries in oil, the UnitedArab Emirates (UAE) is a poor country in terms of waterresources, with groundwater as the only renewableresource. Abu Dhabi, the capital of the UAE, faces many challengessuch as water scarcity, increasing water demand and highlevels of water consumption from the agricultural sector, landscapeirrigation and residential and commercial use. However,the emirate is also trying to seize many opportunities in orderto use its limited water resources in a more sustainable way.Coming from the belief that one hand cannot clap, new policiesare being developed by the Government to increase cooperationbetween the different players in the water sector, starting withthe producers and ending with the consumers.“Water is more important than oil for the United Arab Emirates.”HH General Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al NahyanCrown Prince of Abu Dhabi, Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAEArmed Forces, and Chairman of the Abu Dhabi Executive Councildomestic consumption has a high economic cost and aneven higher environmental cost.Despite having one of the lowest water scarcity indexesin the world, Abu Dhabi also has high per capita waterconsumption rates. In 2008, water consumption was854.5 litres per day, while the world average rangedbetween 160-220 litres per capita per day. This differencewas largely due to outdoor use. Over recent decades,the expansion of agriculture with a view to creatingemployment, protecting rural heritage and makingAbu Dhabi less dependent on imported food has drivendemand for underground water to unsustainable levels.Simultaneously, a burgeoning population, rapid industrializationand commercial and residential megaprojects,and the low prices of water due to government subsidies,have created high demand for desalinated water.The demand for water in Abu Dhabi was estimated tobe 3,313 million cubic metres, 67 per cent of which wasserved by groundwater supplies, 29 per cent by desalinatedwater and only 4 per cent by recycled water. InMany challengesIt is always important to understand the problem and its roots beforesearching for solutions. The UAE has an arid climate and scantyrainfall due to a hyper-arid climate with less than 100 mm of rainfallper year, a low groundwater recharge rate of less than 4 per centof the annual water used, and no reliable, perennial surface waterresources. In 2008, the water scarcity index in the emirate of AbuDhabi was 33 m 3 per capita per year. Therefore, renewable freshwaterresources in the country falls far short of the water scarcitythreshold of 1,000 m 3 per capita per year (a measure of per capitarequirements to meet basic needs), and far below the water scarcityindex of most of its neighbours.Abu Dhabi has been able to overcome the limitations imposedby its scarce renewable water resources by increasing its relianceon non-conventional water sources such as desalinated water andtreated sewage water. In 2011, 64 per cent of its supply came fromgroundwater, 29 per cent from desalinated water and 7 per centfrom treated sewage water. The UAE has the third largest capacityfor desalination behind the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the UnitedStates. Abu Dhabi generates 100 per cent of desalinated water fromcombined cycle power and desalination plants fuelled primarilyby natural gas. The growing dependency on desalinated water forUntil about 50 years ago, Abu Dhabi’s water requirements were metsolely from groundwaterImage: ADFCA[ 263 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATER2011, this demand was driven by the agriculture, forest and parksirrigation that consumed the lion’s share of available resources (72per cent), followed by the domestic sector (16 per cent), government(4.5 per cent), commercial (6.5 per cent), industry (0.5 per cent) andothers (0.5 per cent).In 2011, the agriculture, forests and parks sector was the largestconsumer of water in Abu Dhabi. Water demand in this sector isdecreasing steadily, probably due to the adoption of demand-sidemanagement measures. Water demand by government is also decreasing,but demand in the domestic, commercial and industry and othersectors – all of which rely on desalinated water – is on the rise.Nonetheless, if groundwater abstraction rates continue at the currentlevel, the resource will be depleted in 55 years. And if agriculture startsdepending solely on desalinated water, sectoral competition for desalinatedwater may become a big economic and environmental challenge.According to the Regulation and Supervision Bureau, withplanned socioeconomic growth in the emirate and current consumptionpatterns, water consumption (groundwater, desalinated andrecycled) is expected to triple by 2030. This will have economic,environmental and social implications as the fiscal burden for theGovernment may substantially increase while the longevity ofgroundwater is dramatically reduced.Vision for the futureWith the aim of overcoming the challenges and mitigating the environmentalimpact of planned socioeconomic growth, in 2010 theEnvironment Agency – Abu Dhabi (EAD) embarked on an ambitiousinitiative to develop the Abu Dhabi environment vision 2030(Env2030) on behalf of the Executive Council. Once it is approved,Env2030 will provide an overall guiding framework to consider andpreserve the environment when operating in the emirate. It willguide government entity planning and coordination and inform theprivate sector, the Abu Dhabi population and international peersabout the aspirations of Abu Dhabi. One priority of Env2030 is theefficient management and conservation of water resources, whichrequires broad cross-sector coordination rather thanisolated interventions by individual organizations.Many ambitious but attainable targets are expectedto be achieved by 2030, such as cutting the domesticconsumption of desalinated water by half, stopping theuse of desalinated water for landscape irrigation anddoubling the life of groundwater reserves. Moreover, toreach these targets, many policy imperatives will haveto be achieved in energy and utilities; building andinfrastructure; industry; agriculture, livestock and fisheries;and public realm amenities and forestry sector.A new policy framework for the use ofgroundwater in agricultureThis clear future vision should be supported by a newpolicy framework in order to achieve the balance ofensuring food security while conserving water resources.Groundwater is a vital source of water for Abu Dhabi,especially since agriculture and landscape irrigationconsume the largest share of available water. In 2011,almost 93 per cent of the water used for agricultureand landscape irrigation came from underground wells.Therefore, agriculture and landscape irrigation policiescalling for a more sustainable use of water will have asignificant impact on underground water reserves. Withthis in mind, the Abu Dhabi Government has recentlyestablished a new governance framework for agriculture,endorsing the Abu Dhabi Food Control Authority(ADFCA) to lead the development of the agriculturepolicy framework and create the Abu Dhabi Farmers’Services Centre (ADFSC) to implement the policy. TheAbu Dhabi Government has also introduced new lawsand policies to deal with the competitive agriculturesector by increasing and diversifying production whilepromoting a more rational use of water for irrigation.Image: ADFCAAbu Dhabi Protected Agriculture Center promotes hydroponic or soilless agriculture that uses 90 per cent less water[ 264 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERLaw No. 9 of 2007 Establishing the Department of MunicipalAffairs transferred powers and mandates around agriculture toADFCA, making it the competent authority for agriculture. ADFCAdeveloped the agricultural policy and prepared the plans for achievingsustainable agricultural growth, while mitigating the harmfuleffects of certain improper agricultural practices on the environment.Law No. 4 of 2009 established the ADFSC with the responsibility forimplementing Abu Dhabi’s agricultural policy by engaging farmersto adopt best agricultural practices.With the Agriculture and Food Safety Policy (2011), ADFCAembarked on an ambitious programme of policy development,expanding responsibility for the entire food chain from farm tofork including the safety of foods imported into the emirate. Thisnew policy consists of 11 general policies and 15 agriculture policies.The Agriculture Policy recognizes the challenge of supportingagriculture growth in a context of water scarcity and addresses thepotential environmental concerns in the Agricultural Land UsePolicy, Agricultural Water Use Policy and Production Choice Policy.The Agriculture Water Use Policy (2011) has the objective tomaximize efficiency and support sustainability by covering barriersto efficient agricultural water use; water targets for use; water useimpact assessment to address economic, social and environmentalfactors in reaching decisions on agriculture activities using water;data for water impact assessments; and liaison with other departmentsand agencies. The policy will also combine supply-side anddemand-side management measures, so that the supply-side measuresfocus on increasing the availability of water for crop irrigationand demand-side measures focus on developing and implementingprogrammes to use water resources more efficiently.A new governance and regulatory framework forgroundwater managementHaving a clear vision and developing new policies requires the supportof a strong governance framework to achieve the implementation ofany proposed actions in water management. The currentsystem of water governance in the emirate of Abu Dhabihas reasonably clear lines of demarcation between the entitiesresponsible for each type of water. However, in thearea of groundwater management, limited communicationbetween the various management organizations and usergroups has led to overlaps and gaps between the activitiesof the various federal and emirate-level environmentalorganizations – such as establishing regulations, controllingresource use, and collecting and managing data.To address these issues, the Abu Dhabi Governmenthas made significant progress towards providing aneffective governance framework that clarifies the rolesand responsibilities of the entities managing groundwater,and improves coordination to help streamline watermanagement and regulations to control the abstractions.Executive decisions numbers 14 (session 8/2005) and 4(session 17/2005) commissioned EAD to undertake anassessment of groundwater resources by making it thecompetent authority for managing groundwater in AbuDhabi, including water security initiatives.Law No. 6 of 2006 for Drilling of Wells, and subsequentby-laws and amendments, authorized EAD toregulate the licensing and drilling of water wells andto monitor usage. It also gave EAD employees powersto access any land, farm or facility to conduct researchor collect data on deep water resources. Since then, alicence must be obtained before carrying out any works,including drilling of new wells and deepening of existingwells. In addition, this law is currently is beingreviewed to enable prosecution and penalties for illegalabstraction and selling of underground water.The Water Resource Master Plan (2009) was developedby EAD with the aim of improving the quantity andImage: EADEAD is constructing experimental solar desalination plants that transform saline water from groundwater aquifers into fresh water[ 265 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERquality of water resources in an economically and environmentallyfriendly way. It highlighted the current farming system and how itsrole in food security cannot be maintained because at the current rateof abstraction it is estimated that groundwater will be depleted in 55years. It also proposed institutional and governance reforms.In line with the aspirations of the emirate of Abu Dhabi to integrateefforts for the efficient management and conservation ofwater resources, a permanent committee for water and agricultureresources was established by decree number 87 of 24 December2009. In 2012 the committee approved the creation of a watercouncil which would be responsible for strategic planning anddevelopment across all the water sources and users. It will playa regulatory and supervisory role as well as a coordination rolebetween its member entities to ensure integrated and coherent waterpolicies in the future. In addition, it will oversee the implementationof strategies and projects to address existing gaps in the mandateof entities, and provide the independent guidance and oversight tocome up with the economically best solutions to meet water needsacross the many economic sectors.Supply-side and demand-side initiatives need to be combinedto be more cost-efficientUntil recently, water policy in Abu Dhabi has been largely based oninfrastructure developments to ensure water supply, water securityand food security. As water scarcity will always be a challenge for theemirate no matter how well water is managed, the Abu Dhabi Waterand Electricity Authority led a project to create a strategic waterreserve to use in the case of an emergency in cooperation with EAD.In 2012, 17 billion litres of desalinated water were injected into theLiwa groundwater aquifer, increasing the capacity to supply AbuDhabi’s emergency water needs from 30 to 90 days.As desalinated water will always play an important role in ensuringaccess to water in Abu Dhabi, new clean water generation technologieswill play a major role in the next few decades to addressdemand. EAD has initiated the construction of 22 experimental solardesalination plants that use brackish saline water from groundwateraquifers and transform it into fresh water through reverse osmosis.Abu Dhabi groundwater assessment project provided information that was used toimprove the regulatory framework protecting groundwaterImage: EADThis water is used as watering holes for wild animals andto irrigate natural vegetation to create food and shelter.These projects provide information about the feasibilityof using renewable energy to supply future water needs.There is no doubt that managing the demand can bea more cost-efficient option than managing the supply,since this will require large infrastructure developmentprojects. In recent years, the Government of AbuDhabi has attempted to rationalize water consumptionthrough demand-side management initiatives. Forexample, in 2011, the ADFSC had the responsibility forimplementing a strategic plan for farmers. The plan aimsto achieve a 40 per cent presence of locally-producedfruits and vegetables in the markets of the emirate by2015 (from the current share of about 15 per cent),and to reduce water consumption by 40 per cent by2013. These targets will be achieved through providingagricultural services to the farmers and strengtheningtheir awareness, as well as helping them marketingtheir products. Another initiative, regulation number7 of 2010, aims to phase out subsidies for the cultivationof crops with high water consumption, especiallyRhodes grass, which was found to consume more that59 per cent of water in agriculture. On the other hand,the ADFSC is working with other entities to introducefeed that have high tolerance to salinity and drought. Itis also working on rationalizing the use of water irrigationfor palm trees, which is the second highest waterconsumer at almost 34 per cent of water consumption,by providing farms with modern irrigation networks.ADFCA is also looking into the use of recycled waterin agriculture and is currently implementing a projectto irrigate 216 farms with it, as it is used well below itspotential in Abu Dhabi. In 2009, only 55 per cent ofrecycled water was used for irrigation, while 45 per centwas discharged to the Arabian Gulf due to the lack ofproper infrastructure for transmission.Believing in the importance and the effectiveness ofthe integrated work and planning, ADFCA and EADhave collaborated to set up the Abu Dhabi ProtectedAgriculture centre to adopt new technologies andpromote the use of greenhouses and soilless agriculture,which uses 90 per cent less water for the samevolume of crops produced. ADFCA and EAD have alsorecently joined forces to develop a high-level strategyand action plan to balance the needs of agriculture withwater availability.Overall, it is clear that Abu Dhabi is dealing withmany challenges that are threatening water security inthe country, especially with having groundwater as theonly renewable resource. With these challenges comemany solutions and opportunities to conserve waterresources while supporting food security and economicdevelopment, mainly by improving cooperation betweenthe different players in the water sector. The growingcollaboration between ADFCA and EAD, in spite of theirdifferent interests, shows the way forward to ensure amore rational use of this precious resource that is moreimportant than oil to meet our basic vital needs.[ 266 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERWater resources management as an engine foreconomic growth in the Republic of KoreaKyung-Jin Min, Director and Sunkyo Hong, Researcher, Research Center for Water Policy and Economy, K-waterThe Republic of Korea today enjoys a high standard of livingand produces cutting-edge technology, as well as creatingand exporting high quality consumer electronics. In termsof numbers, Korea is the world’s thirteenth-largest economy andits twenty-fifth most populous country. 1 However, just 50 yearsago, Korea was one of the poorest countries in the world, with agross domestic product (GDP) per capita of less than US$100 atthe beginning of the 1960s. 2 This economic transformation fromindigence to modern economic powerhouse has come to be knownas ‘the Miracle on the Han River’, which is the river that flowsthrough Seoul, Korea’s capital. This is an appropriate name, asit suggests that the river played a part in the transformation.Indeed, Korea’s rapid growth and development would not havebeen possible without the water resources and their development.There follows an account of how the management and developmentof water resources has served as an engine for growth in Koreathrough the various phases of its development history. An explorationof the institutional framework for water resources developmentwill be followed by examples of cooperation among interest groups.The headquarters of the Korea Water Resources Corporation (K-water)Image: K-waterThese various aspects of Korea’s water development areexplored with reference to the role of the Korea WaterResources Corporation, or K-water.Korea’s economic development history can be viewedin terms of decadal phases: post-war reconstruction inthe 1950s following the Korean War, the building of lightindustries in the 1960s, large investments in the heavy andchemical industries and the modernization of agriculturein the 1970s, economic liberalization in the 1980s, andglobalization and aid regulation in the 1990s. 3 The firstphase, the 1950s, was the period following the KoreanWar. The Korean economy during this time dependedheavily on foreign aid, most of it from the United States,and economic policy was one of import substitution.The flour, sugar and cotton-spinning industries receivedspecial attention, 4 but given the aid-dependent nature ofthe economy, the import substitution policy was at best amodest success, recording annual growth of 3.9 per cent. 5The next two decades saw the launch of great economicprogress under a new government and new economicpolicy. Policy during this period and until the mid-1980swas guided by five-year economic and social developmentplans drafted by the Economic Planning Board(EPB) established in 1961. Under the EPB’s guidance,GDP in the 1960s grew 8.5 per cent annually, manufacturing(mainly from light industries) grew 17 per centannually, and gross national product per capita tripledfrom US$82 in 1961 to US$253 in 1970. Unemploymentalso fell from 8.1 per cent in 1963 to 4.4 per cent in1970. A strongly export-oriented strategy and favourableforeign trade environment drove this growth, whichdespite rising inflation reduced absolute poverty andsecured the foundations for a self-sustaining economy. 6The nurturing of six heavy and chemical industries(HCI) – steel, shipbuilding, machinery, electronics,petrochemistry and nonferrous metals – and the ambitiousgoals to raise the per capita income to US$1,000and achieve US$10 billion in exports defined the 1970s. 7During this period, Korea saw the modernization of itsagriculture and the launch of the Saemaeul Undong, orNew Village Movement, a nationwide effort to developand improve standard of living. The economy continuedto enjoy rapid growth, averaging 9.1 per cent between1971 and 1980. HCI’s share of manufacturing’s contributionto GDP increased from 37.8 per cent to 57.5 per centbetween the beginning and end of the decade. 8[ 267 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERWhile the Government had commandeered the economy in theprevious decades, with the growth of the economy and the developmentof the private sector, the Government took on a lesser role,ushering in liberalization in the 1980s. Along with liberalization, themain economic policy was maintaining price stability. Through thesepolicies, the Korean economy continued to enjoy high growth, achievinga low of 6.8 per cent in 1989 and a high of 12.3 per cent in 1987. 9The latter years of the 1980s saw a change in policy from pricestability to preference for growth – a change that served as the policycontext of the following decade. Within this policy environment,regulations were lifted for Korea’s large corporations, which took ona large volume of loans in their aggressive expansion attempts in thecontext of globalization. This economic modus operandi was rudelyinterrupted by the Asian financial crisis of 1997, as a result of whichKorea submitted to loans from the International Monetary Fund andtheir associated conditionalities. Following the crisis and from the2000s on, Korea has continued to grow to its currently respectedstatus, though not at the same growth rates it achieved in the past.An integral part of Korea’s development was the development ofits water resources. Water resources development has a number ofobjectives which may be prioritized according to a country’s immediateneeds. In Korea’s case, building basic water infrastructure was theprimary objective early on from the mid-1960s through to the 1980s. In1973, the Soyanggang Dam was constructed and in 1977, the AndongDam. These and other multipurpose dams secured water, generatedhydropower and reduced damage from floods. Securing water was animportant goal, as demonstrated by the tripling of total water consumptionfrom 5 billion cubic metres in 1965 to 15 billion cubic metres in1980. 10 The 1980s was a period of unbalanced growth and water qualityWater storage and gross national income in Korea25,000GNIWater source10,000degradation. However, following the phenol accident in1991 and the environmental awareness it raised, waterpolicy began to seriously consider water quality in additionto quantity. Following this trend of environmentalawareness, water policy since 2000 has been directed toeco-friendly and sustainable water management. This hasinvolved building medium-sized and small dams ratherthan large ones, water demand management, and restoringrivers. Korea, through its Ministry of Land, Transport andMaritime Affairs (now the Ministry of Land, Infrastructureand Transport) and K-water, has managed to reduce flooddamage by a factor of 10 through the Four Major RiversRestoration Project. 11 Moreover, Korea has secured asix times larger water supply compared to 1965. 12 Thissecuring of water supply has important implicationsfor economic growth, as water is an essential resourcein economic activity. The amount of water that can bestored serves as an upper limit to industrial output, whichdirectly contributes to national income.These policies have occurred within the institutionalframework for water resources management provided byvarious plans. 13 The National Territorial Plan and theNational Environmental Plan, which were directed by theFive-Year Economic and Social Development Plan, arethose under which more specific water plans have beendrafted. The National Water Resources Plan, the NationalWater Supply Plan and the National Sewerage Plan fallunder these two plans. The Long-term Plan for DamConstruction falls under the National Water ResourcesPlan, the Maintenance Plan for Water Supply under theNational Water Supply Plan, and the Maintenance Planfor Sewerage under the National Sewerage Plan. Thus,the institutional framework for water resources managementin Korea consists of three areas.Working within this framework are a number ofbodies that implement the management of water20,0008,000Korea’s institutional framework for water administrationGNI (US$)15,00010,0006,0004,000Water storage (106m 3 )The nationalterritorialplanThe nationalenvironmentalplanThe nationalwater resourcesplanThe nationalwater supply planThe nationalsewerage plan5,0002,000001960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010The long-termplan fordam constructionThe maintenanceplan forwater supplyThe maintenanceplan forsewerageYearThe amount of water stored serves as an upper limit to industrial outputSource: K-waterSource: Min, The Role of the State and the Market, p268, figure 36[ 268 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERRiver restoration and sustainable water managementImage: K-waterThe Gangjeong Goryeong Weir before (left) and after (right)An example of sustainable water management is the Four Major RiversRestoration Project. 21 As its name implies, restoring the health of the riversis among the large-scale project’s holistic aims, which also include resilienceto extreme weather events and the economic and cultural stimulation ofriverside communities. The project involves the construction of 16 multipurposebarrages or weirs (completed in 2012) and dredging, as well asthe revitalization of the riverside into ecological parks, camping sites, sportsfacilities, docks and nearly 1,800 km of cycle paths. These recreationalareas have increased the value of the rivers and adjacent land and havepromoted economic activity. Natural waterways and fish paths have alsobeen restored. The barrages or weirs have led to the decrease in flood levelof the main river by 2-4 metres despite record rainfall. Flood damage hasbeen greatly reduced as a result, even though four typhoons passed throughthe country in 2012. The project has also secured 1.17 billion m 3 of waterresources, ensuring stable water supply despite the severe droughts of Mayand June the same year. Thus, the project symbolizes green growth throughreduced economic loss, economic stimulation in the waterfront areas, andimproved water quality and restored natural waterway function.resources. 14 K-water is the public corporation directly responsiblefor Korea’s water administration, with its activities influenced bythree ministries: Security and Public Administration, Environment,and Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT). These ministriesconsult with each other granting approval, setting regulation,establishing the national plans and providing subsidies for theoperation of water services and projects. K-water is accountableto MOLIT, which oversees its operations. In turn, K-water provideswater to industrial consumers and contracts with local governmentsto provide them with water through the multi-regionalsystems. Local governments then provide water and sewerageservices to households and industry. Thus, the very organizationalframework of water management in Korea involves close cooperationamong government agencies, K-water, local governments andthe private sector.Cooperation was an essential part of Korea’s development. The iconicexample is the Saemaeul Undong, or New Village Movement, duringthe 1970s. The movement began with the aim of improving the livingenvironment of rural farming communities. Due to its early success, themovement was expanded to a nationwide scale with more ambitiousgoals. Village communities were categorized into three groups dependingon their level of self-improvement, with more aid allocated to themore successful groups. This movement rallied the national spirit todiligence, self-improvement and collective efforts while at the same timeincreasing the competitiveness of villages for government aid. Amongthe KRW 3.4 trillion invested in the movement during the 1970s, nearlyhalf was contributed by residents themselves. 15 Furthermore, the movementexpanded far beyond the scope of agriculture, giving rise to theUrban Saemaeul Undong, Regional Saemaeul Undong,Women’s Saemaeul Undong, Workplace SaemaeulUndong, Factory Saemaeul Undong, Saemaeul TeenagersUndong and a number of other Saemaeul movements. 16 Asa result of the movement, besides increases in agriculturalproductivity, basic infrastructure was laid through thepaving of roads, maintaining of small rivers and streams,installation of waterworks and drainage systems, andprovision of electricity and telephones to every village.More pertinently, the involvement of the privatesector in national water resources development exemplifiescooperation for national economic growth. Inthe case of the Soyanggang Dam, Hyundai Engineeringand Construction was contracted to build the dam.The project began in 1967 with actual constructionbeginning the following year, and finished in 1973,upon which the dam became the motive force forthe Miracle on the Han River. 17 Initially, a Japaneseconstruction company had proposed building aconcrete dam, but given Korea’s limited cementproduction capacity, and upon Hyundai’s proposalfor a rock-filled dam that would cost the nation farless, Hyundai became the private constructor. Theconstruction was a notable feat, given the notion thata rock-filled dam could only be feasible economicallyup to a height of 30 metres. At a height of 123 metres,the Soyanggang Dam is the tallest dam in Korea. Anadditional, and perhaps greater, significance of the[ 269 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERImage: K-waterThe Soyanggang Dam exemplifies the government-business cooperation at the heart of Korea’s developmentSoyanggang Dam case is that it employed a domestic companyto undertake the large-scale project, thereby promoting industrializationand strengthening the government-business ties thatbecame the hallmark of Korea’s development.More recently, since 2006, the Government through the Ministryof Environment has enabled investments from the private sector intothe sewerage business. The objective of this measure is to increase thecompetitiveness of the sewerage business through the incorporationof private sector funds and technology. Through this public-privatepartnership, investments of KRW 243.8 billion won (US$220 million)have been made in the sewerage of Gimpo City, 18 and plans are in placeto invest KRW 172.3 billion (US$150 million) in Gunja City’s sewerage.19 According to 2011 figures, among the 496 sewage disposal plantsthat handle over 500 tons of waste daily, 70 per cent operate throughconsigned management while the remaining 30 per cent are directlyoperated by local governments. Among these, 17 per cent, or 85 locations,are build-transfer-operate projects. 20As Korea’s development experience shows, effective, cooperativewater resources management has been an essential part of growthand development. Water-related issues are inextricablyintertwined with economic, social and environmentalissues, and as global issues (for example in the formof water disasters stemming from climate change),they require the close cooperation of all the relevantplayers, including governments, international institutions,non-governmental organizations (NGOs) andthe public and private sectors, if they are to be solvedor managed. The key role of effective water resourcesmanagement in Korea’s development can providea good example to developing countries seekingways to develop and manage their water resources.Moreover, at the core of this effective water managementhas been K-water, which from its founding hasbeen working in cooperation with related organizationsand NGOs. This cooperation has not only beenin the area of water resources management, but also inthe area of cooperation with countries concerned witheconomic development.270
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERPUB Singapore’s efforts inadvancing water cooperationMs Quek Ai Choo, Deputy Director; Mr Bernard Tan, Senior Assistant Director;Mr Yeo Sheng Wei, Senior Manager; Ms Nawwar Syahirah, Communications Executive, PUB, SingaporeThe United Nations has declared 2013 as the InternationalYear of Water Cooperation. This declaration is especiallypertinent because water management transcendsgeographical, cultural and physical boundaries. Many countriesshare a common, critical interest in water – for example theUSA and Mexico, or Singapore and Malaysia. Within a country,it is just as important for governments to work with theirpeople, the private and public sectors and the global communityat large, to deliver sustainable solutions for water supply.PUB engages schools from the primary level to cultivate students as waterconservation advocatesImage: PUBDuring his visit to Singapore in 2012 Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary Generalof the United Nations, made two points on water. Firstly, on thesubject of cooperation, he said that “no single country can solve theworld’s problems by itself.” Secondly, after his visit to Singapore’sNEWater Visitor Centre, he remarked that “such Singaporean experienceand know-how (in water recycling) … should be shared bymany countries which have water scarcity problems.” The underlyingmessage is clear: it is important for the global watercommunity to come together, cooperate and co-createinnovative solutions to solve our water challenges.Singapore’s achievements in water today did not comeby chance. According to the United Nations WorldWater Development Report, Singapore is ranked 170in a list of 190 countries in terms of freshwater availability.Just a few decades ago, Singapore had only twowater supply sources – imported water from Malaysiaand local catchment water. In terms of sanitation, notall homes were sewered and high volumes of water wereunaccounted for. Today, Singapore enjoys a diversifiedand robust water supply through the ‘Four NationalTaps’ – local catchment water; imported water; ultraclean,high-grade reclaimed water known as NEWater;and desalinated water. The water in Singapore is wellwithin the World Health Organization’s guidelines fordrinking-water quality and is safe to drink directlyfrom the tap. Singapore also has one of the lowestunaccounted-for-water rates in the world, and it is fullyserved by modern sanitation. This was achieved onlythrough the strong political will of its leaders, goodwater governance and working closely with its partners.As Singapore’s national water agency, PUB is responsiblefor the management of the entire water loop, fromstormwater management to potable water supply, usedwater collection and treatment, water reclamation andseawater desalination. PUB’s water management strategycan be summed up by its corporate tagline: ‘Waterfor all: Conserve, Value, Enjoy’. ‘Water for all’ refers toPUB’s supply strategy which entails integrated planning,implementing water infrastructure ahead of demand andeffective use of new technology to bring Singaporeans arobust and reliable water supply. However, installing theinfrastructure to supply water is only one half of the equation.As the population and economy continue to grow,Singapore needs to ensure that the demand for water doesnot rise at an unsustainable rate. Achieving a sustainablelevel of water consumption and managing the impact ofwater on the environment takes the commitment andparticipation of the community. This is encapsulated inthe second half of the tagline – ‘Conserve, Value, Enjoy’– which underscores PUB’s focus on water conservationand efforts to bring the people closer to water so that theycould enjoy and cherish this precious resource.[ 271 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERImage: PUBDr Vivian Balakrishnan, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, Singapore and Mr Chew Men Leong, Chief Executive, PUB Singapore (centre, both inwhite) posing for pictures with the community after engaging in water activities by the Singapore River during World Water Day 2012PUB’s experience in water management over the years shows thattechnology and research and development (R&D) were key to overcomingSingapore’s natural vulnerabilities and achieving an adequateand secure water supply. For example, NEWater and desalinationwere made possible by technological breakthroughs followingdecades of research efforts. R&D will continue to be vital in ensuringa sustainable water supply for the future. With the challengesof climate change effects and increasing energy costs, governmentsand water utilities must find innovative ways to contain the risingcosts of treating and producing water and identifying new sources.This is where water cooperation can bring about several benefits.Cooperation is about short circuiting the solutions development process:Sir Isaac Newton once said: “If I have seen farther, it is by standingon the shoulders of giants.” As countries develop at different paces,some may encounter the same issues that others have faced before.For example, as part of the NEWater development process, Singaporelooked to the United States, where reclaimed water was already usedin places such as California and Arizona to replenish undergroundaquifers and surface reservoirs. The opportunity to learn from othersaround the world was instrumental to Singapore’s success in developingNEWater as a viable source of water. Today, NEWater, or recycledused water, can meet 30 per cent of Singapore’s total water needs, andthat figure is expected to reach up to 55 per cent by 2060.Cooperation is about finding solutions to meet new challenges: Accordingto the International Desalination Association Desalination Yearbook2009-2010, there are almost 15,000 desalination plants worldwide.Among Singapore’s four sources of water, desalinated water is the mostexpensive source due to its high energy requirement and the increasingcosts of energy. As pointed out by Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, Ministerfor the Environment and Water Resources, Singapore, “Singapore hastranslated a dependence on water into a dependence on energy.” Findingways to reduce energy costs represents one of PUB’s biggest challenges.PUB therefore works closely with companies likeKeppel Seghers and Siemens, and research institutionssuch as the Nanyang Environment and WaterResearch Institute and the NUS EnvironmentalResearch Institute, with the long-term goal of reducingthe energy consumed during desalination as muchas possible. This will strengthen the viability of desalinatedwater as an affordable water source not just forSingapore, but for the world.Cooperation is a double coincidence of wants: PUB alsoworks closely with the global water industry to come upwith new, innovative ideas that may make a differenceto the water world. It encourages water companies toleverage Singapore as a ‘living laboratory’ to test-bed andcommercialize cutting-edge technology. PUB opens itsfacilities for companies to test-bed their technologiesunder actual site conditions, which will help fast-trackthe commercialization of their technologies. This alsohelps PUB to assess the latest technologies that are suitableto solve its water challenges.Cooperation is about building relationships: Throughadvances in communication technology, the world aswe know it is getting smaller. Many people are nowa phone call, text message or e-mail away. Singaporehas established friendships with many other countriesfacing water challenges through PUB’s sharing of itsurban water management knowledge. In partnershipwith organizations such as the Singapore CooperationEnterprise and Temasek Foundation, PUB has assistedother nations such as the Government of Mauritiusand India’s Delhi Jal Board in areas such as non-revenuewater, water reuse and community engagement.[ 272 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERImage: PUB3,000 Singaporeans form a giant water droplet and pledge to conserve water during World Water Day 2013During times of crisis, PUB also provided humanitarian assistanceand support to Thailand’s Metropolitan Water Authority when thelatter encountered floods in 2011.To get Singaporeans to conserve, value and enjoy our waters,PUB’s strategy is to encourage them to build relationshipswith water. The Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters (ABC Waters)Programme, introduced in 2006, represented a paradigm shift:instead of keeping people away to maintain the cleanliness ofthe waters, PUB opened up the reservoirs and rivers for recreationalactivities and created beautiful landscapes with communityspaces for all to enjoy. By creating opportunities for Singaporeansto bond with water, the ABC Waters Programme helps encouragethem to be joint stewards of water, committed to cherishing andconserving water.Cooperation helps PUB to deliver its mission better: PUB leveragesthe private sector’s strengths to supplement its efforts to deliverour mission. Through public-private partnership (PPP) schemes, itaims to bring together the expertise and resources of the public andprivate sectors to provide services to the public. For instance, byinvolving the private sector in the design, build and operation of theplants, PUB is able to obtain the best value for money and producewater in a cost-effective manner.In addition, as some of Singapore’s water infrastructure plantsare operated privately, this gives PUB a common platform to benchmarkits operations against private companies operating undersimilar conditions. For example, the SingSpring Desalination Plant(a PPP project with Hyflux Limited) has not only provided PUBwith cost-effective desalinated water, it also demonstrated how theprivate sector continues to innovate. By optimizing its operationsand making its processes more efficient, PUB would then be able topass the savings on to its customers.Cooperating with the water industry gives PUB a wide spectrumof technology to tap into and improve efficiency. PUB’s proactiveapproach to provide incentives for companies to grow and doresearch in Singapore has kept it at the forefront ofsolutions that can help to solve its water challenges.Working with partners to grow a vibrantwater industryOver the years, PUB has leveraged its experience in tacklingwater challenges to create a vibrant water industryin Singapore. It has built on this to create a hub forwater technology, by sharing knowledge with others inurban water management and helping to develop technologiesto address new water challenges.The Singapore Government has identified the waterand environment industry as a key economic growthsector. It set up the Environment and Water IndustryProgramme Office (EWI) in 2006 and committed S$470million in research budget for the funding of waterR&D projects. This is a collaborative, multi-agencyeffort which includes other agencies such as:• Agency for Science, Technology and Research• International Enterprise Singapore• JTC Corporation• Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources• Ministry of National Development• National Environment Agency• National Research Foundation• Nanyang Technological University• National University of Singapore• Singapore Economic Development Board• SPRING Singapore• Singapore Workforce Development Agency.EWI’s objective is to strengthen the capabilities of theSingapore water industry, and to contribute jobs andeconomic development to Singapore. To achieve this,[ 273 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERKey Events of SIWW, focusing on different sectors of the water value chainProgrammeLee Kuan Yew Water PrizeWater Leaders SummitWater ConventionWater ExpoBusiness ForumsConceptAn international water prize to recognize the achievements of individuals and/or organizations in thedevelopment of breakthrough water technologies or policies and programmes which benefit humanityA by-invitation, high-level event bringing together global water leaders to discuss pertinent water issues andpolicy solutionsA leading-edge international technology and water systems management conference to share and discusstechnical solutionsAn international water technologies exhibition showcasing leading water technologies, products and casestudies of integrated urban solutionsA platform for networking, business matching and sharing of global market opportunitiesSource: PUBit has three key strategic goals: to grow a vibrant base of watercompanies and research institutions; to develop the human andtechnical capabilities of Singapore’s water industry; and to profileand export the capabilities of Singapore-based water companies.EWI is on track to achieve its goals. From 2006 to 2012, the clusterof water companies in Singapore has doubled to 100, alongside 25research institutions. More than 120 test-bedding projects havebeen conducted at PUB’s facilities. Singapore-based water companieshave secured almost S$9 billion worth of overseas projects inthe same period.Co-creating solutions with the global water industryThe Singapore International Water Week (SIWW) represents allof PUB’s water cooperation efforts combined into one global platform.SIWW is a key initiative to profile and grow the Singaporewater industry. The first event was held in 2008, and saw 8,500participants from 79 countries. Over the past five years the eventhas gained traction. The 2012 event saw a strong turnout of morethan 19,000 participants from 104 countries and regions, with over750 participating companies. From 2012 onward, the event willbe held in conjunction with the World Cities Summit (focused onurban solutions) and the CleanEnviro Summit Singapore (focusedon environmental solutions), a unique three-in-one event focusedon urban sustainability.Positioned as the global platform for sharing and co-creation ofinnovative water solutions, SIWW focuses on municipal, industrial,integrated city-water-environment issues, and on forward-lookingchallenges and solutions. With key events focused on differentsectors of the water value chain, the events reinforce each other toencourage participation from the various stakeholders.An important value proposition of water conferences is forparticipants to build relationships and explore collaborationopportunities with a myriad of stakeholders. Thus, one of SIWW’sstrengths lies in its strong emphasis on networking and businessmatchmaking for its participants. Co-location with the WorldCities Summit and CleanEnviro Summit Singapore allows water,environment and urban professionals to discuss integrated issuesand challenges. Other key events such as TechXchange and theIndustrial Water Solutions Forum allow for technology providers,venture capitalists, buyers and sellers to match theirneeds with solutions. SIWW’s dedicated networkingplatforms, such as Connect@SIWW, also help to facilitateinteraction; over 300 meetings were organized viaConnect@SIWW in 2012.With almost 1,300 articles generated across print,broadcast, online and trade from local and internationalmedia during the 2012 event, the intense mediaspotlight on SIWW makes it an excellent platform toshare collaboration intentions and make announcements.Some examples of announcements made duringSIWW 2012 include the opening of Hyflux’s InnovationCentre, the signing of a memorandum of understandingbetween PUB and Rand Water, and an announcementby Saudi Arabia’s National Water Company that itwould be investing approximately S$11 billion oncapital expenditure up to 2017. In all, these contributedto S$13.6 billion worth of announcements at the event.The next SIWW will be held from 1-5 June 2014. Inthe lead-up to the event, PUB is organizing the SIWWWater Utilities Leaders Forum for leaders from theglobal water utilities sector to share issues and challenges,and chart future directions and strategies toimprove each other’s operations. Held in Singapore inSeptember 2013, the invitation-only event will target150 leaders from the global water utilities sector. Within-depth discussions focused on key issues for effectivewater and wastewater management, the forumwill be another excellent opportunity for global waterutility leaders to build relationships and share ideas toimprove their respective operations.With water challenges getting increasingly complex,crossing boundaries and transcending sectors, the needfor water cooperation has never been more important. Tothis end, PUB is pleased to support the United Nationscommitment for greater water cooperation, and looksforward to exploring collaborations with interestedparties to co-create innovative water solutions to meetfuture challenges.[ 274 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERTowards water sensitive cities:a three-pillar approachTony H. F. Wong, Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive CitiesWhat is a water sensitive city? It is a city that interactswith the hydrological cycle to provide the water securityessential for sustained economic prosperity – byefficient and well-researched use of resources, including somethat have been overlooked by earlier generations of experts. Itis a city that enhances and protects the health of watercoursesand wetlands. It factors into all of its planning the risk oflooming drought and rising sea levels – and equally, the riskof sudden and unforeseeable floods. Such a city creates publicspaces that harvest, clean and recycle water. Its management ofwater contributes to biodiversity, carbon sequestration and thereduction of urban ‘heat islands’. A water sensitive city is onewhere water’s journey through the urban landscape is managedwith regard for its origins and its destinations – and where itsspiritual and cultural significance is celebrated. That city meetschallenges to the supply of life-giving water with integrity (notevasion), breadth of vision (not the expedient perspectives ofsectional interests), and evidence-based practice (not slogansfrom the past, nor borrowings from some imagined future).Our cities are water supply catchments – as illustrated by the Royal Park Wetland inMelbourne, used for harvesting and treating urban stormwaterImage: Tony H. F. WongWhat policies will yield these results? Three pillarsemerge to support such development – as affirmed byresearch at the Cooperative Research Centre for WaterSensitive Cities, an Australian Government initiative toforge partnerships between research institutions andindustry, to find solutions to global challenges. Thesethree pillars are overarching principles for meeting thechallenge of developing sustainable and resilient urbanwater systems:• cities as water-supply catchments• cities that provide ecosystem services• cities with the social and institutional capital forsustainability, resilience and liveability.Far from being abstractions or mere theoretical underpinnings,these pillars respond to a real need for realchange. They are eminently practical. We accept as agiven the energy and the bursting vitality of moderncities. That is not simply a part of the problem; it is alsoa significant part of the solution – so long as the threepillars are firmly established. And crucially, there areimplications for less developed cities.The first of our three pillars, cities as water-supplycatchments, stands in direct opposition to the traditionalmodel in which a city’s needs are passively servedby catchments external to it. Cities typically dependexclusively on the capture of rainfall run-off from ruralor forested catchments and/or on depleting groundwaterresources; but the evidence is that such a one-way transactionis far from optimal. It is certainly not sustainableas a universal solution. Communities become hostageto increasing temperatures and drying soils – problemsthat are all the more pressing because of ‘normal’climate variability, progressively worsened by thereality of long-term climate change. Reflex reliance onthe conventional approach (“just build another dam”)is no longer sufficient. The effects of climate changeare uncertain, and rainfall is not invariably reduced.But overall, it is established that global temperaturescontinue to trend higher. Drier catchments are nolonger a feature of one projected future among many;they are an inevitability. And drier catchments meandecreased run-off. Our precarious dependency on soilmoisture in external catchment areas has to be broken.This situation calls for a radically new model. Citiesthemselves have enormous potential as catchments,[ 275 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERImage: Tony H. F. WongGreen corridors and constructed wetlands are multifunctional green infrastructure, providing ecosystem services including water quality improvement,micro-climate enhancement, flood conveyance and increasing biodiversityto reduce their dependency on externally sourced water, includingdesalination of seawater, by accessing locally derived waterin a portfolio of water sources. A serious departure from nineteenthand twentieth century thinking? Yes. The old plans andprecepts are unworkable, as even the current state of cities makesclear. Traditional mechanisms of governance yield fragmentedinfrastructure and compartmentalized service provision. Thesereductive ‘either/or’ approaches have had their day and new, holistic,integrated solutions are called for. We need more sophisticatedperceptions of system boundaries, whereby a city may be seen asboth a generator and a consumer of essential resources. Embracingthe concept of diverse water supplies and mixed infrastructureswill give cities enormous flexibility, freeing them to access a wealthof sources at minimal cost. Each of the alternative water sourceswill have its own level of reliability and its own environmentalcost-and-risk profile. In a future water sensitive city, each sourcecan be optimized through diversified and parallel infrastructures– for water harvesting, water treatment and new ways of storageand delivery. Depending on a city’s particular conformation andneeds, the mix might include both centralized and decentralizedelements – from a simple rainwater tank for non-potable use tolarge-scale schemes for redirecting or reusing water.The second pillar supporting water sensitive cities, cities providingecosystem services, has a place close to the first. Like it, thispillar stands against traditional ways that have outworn their usefulness;but now the principle is broader. We may consider it under theheading ‘water sensitive urban design’ (WSUD). The water sensitivecity must provide green infrastructure more generally,not just a sustainable water catchment for itself – theimperative upheld by the first pillar.Landscapes are the product of both natural andhuman forces, interacting in regional ecosystemsand beyond. Public spaces are essential to publicamenity – or putting it differently, to the materialconditions that enable human flourishing. However,urban landscapes must be functional beyond providingamenity. Our conception of the value inherent inopen space needs to be enlarged, by consideration ofthe ecological functioning of urban landscapes. Thisexpanded view encompasses great diversity: sustainablewater management, microclimate influences,facilitation of carbon sinks, use of ‘low-mileage’ foodproduction, environments for wildlife and more.Excluding the urban environment from this interwovenfabric is yet another reductive, binary-thinkingnotion that has outstayed its welcome. Three broadthemes characterize the ecological design objectivesfor urban landscapes: nature conservation (buildingand conserving biodiversity, in terrestrial and aquaticenvironments of the city); urban-rural interfacemanagement (protecting and rehabilitating highconservationareas regardless of where they are found,and mitigating the environmental impacts of urbanization);and urban ecology (urban design incorporating[ 276 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERbio-mimicry, towards green infrastructure that organically integratesanthropogenic and natural features). The fundamental ideais a holistic rather than a fragmentary engagement with the taskof managing resources. There is, after all the analysis, just oneenvironment – not several. The urban and the natural are not asdistinct as traditional thinking has assumed.The third and last pillar, cities with the social and institutionalcapital for sustainability, resilience, and liveability, stands unitedwith the other pillars and in contradiction to superseded ways ofthinking; but it demands a more extended explanation. While citieshave long been condemned as alienating and alienated – prone to becharacterized as inhuman blemishes on the landscape rather than ascentres for human thriving – we can with at least equal justificationcelebrate, nurture and harness the social capital that is concentratedin the modern city. Cities are not simply the problem; the moderncity’s emergent social properties make it a source of solutions. Weencountered precursors of this idea above: according to the firstpillar, cities have infrastructure that can be turned to use as newwater catchments; and according to the second pillar, the urbanruraldivide is best treated as artificial anyway, to be transcended forhuman purposes as much as for ‘natural’ ones. We saw how WSUDcan work as a set of ‘urban design solutions’ for the provision ofgreen infrastructure. Now we must extend the idea. Technologybased on biophysical-science research alone cannot deliver, andour appreciation of the crucial role institutions play in sustainableresource usage is just beginning. We argue that unless new technologiesare socially and institutionally embedded, their developmentwill not yield complete solutions for urban water management. Thesocial and institutional dimensions must be included in the holisticvision too, on an equal footing with technological initiatives.Insight in this area is elusive. The socio-institutional dimensionsof WSUD, necessary for effective policy development andtechnology diffusion, need more research. Our analysisof the historical and socio-technical drivers ofWSUD development across Melbourne (a city oftenidentified as a WSUD leader, both nationally andinternationally, especially for stormwater management)revealed that the deployment of WSUD inMelbourne has been the result of a complex interplaybetween key ‘champions’ (or change agents) andimportant local variables. In particular, the championsrepresent a small and informally connectedgroup of individuals across government, academiaand the development industry. These are the playerswho have pursued change from an ideology of bestpractice management, consistently underpinnedby local developments in science and technology.Beyond the existence of champions, analysis revealedthe involvement of instrumental variables – amixture of historical accident and intentional advocacyoutcomes such as the rise of environmentalism,external funding avenues and the establishment ofa number of industry-focused cooperative researchcentres. The implications are well worth pursuing;but it is important now to highlight sustainability,resilience, and liveability – the desiderata mentionedin connection with the third pillar.Sustainability in the service of water sensitive citiesdemands a solid reserve of sociopolitical capital, andan assurance that citizens’ decision-making and behaviourare themselves water sensitive. It is a matter ofeducation in the broadest sense: the community mustvalue an ecologically sustainable lifestyle, with aheightened receptivity to necessary innovations, andImage: Prof. Zhu Qiang and Prof. Li Yuanhong, Gansu Institute of Water Conservancy, ChinaHarvesting rainwater (left) and harvesting road run-off in rural China (right) – simple ways for our cities and towns to serve as catchments[ 277 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERappreciate the need for balance between consumption and conservationof the city’s natural resources. The goal of sustainabilityrepresents a paradigm shift in urban design – as much in thecitizens as in the ‘experts’.Resilience for water sensitive cities rests on enlightened riskmanagement, looking beyond the month, the year or the decade.In developed countries, strategies to meet emerging challenges areoften encumbered by ‘path-dependent lock-in’: narrow horizonsand an institutional legacy that limits the range of acceptable interventionsto those that fit old paradigms. But the old paradigms forwater management have broken down, and there is no turningback. Many attempted solutions address only the efficiency ofexisting urban water systems; but that is not enough. To borrowfrom Aesop’s well-known fable, the oak that simply grows largerand thicker does not gain resilience – which comes, after all, fromflexibility accompanied by a sense of scale and balance. Resilienceis responsiveness. It is adaptation to new scenarios, new visionsand new prospective solutions. Successful urban communities areextremely complex socio-physical systems that are fully integratedand constantly evolving. Harmony of the built, social and naturalenvironments within a city depends on interactions betweensocial capital and natural resources. Urban communities must bedesigned for resilience in the face of climate change, particularlyallowing for the sustainable management of water resources andthe protection of water environments. The ‘wicked problem’ weface in building water resilience against increased climatic variabilityand uncertainty is multifaceted. It cannot be narrowly orexclusively focused on water management, or on hard separationof any traditional categories; sustainable solutions will be holisticinterdisciplinary solutions.Liveability in water sensitive cities may be an outcome, but it isalso a prerequisite. The human-friendly quality of public spaces isnecessary if urban landscape is to enjoy the respect of city-dwellers.The ecological functioning of the urban landscapes – capturing theessence of sustainable water management, microclimate influences,facilitation of carbon sinks and use for food production – cannotproceed unless it is harmonized with the natural human need forfreedom of access, ease of movement and space for play and refreshment.Liveable spaces are sustainable spaces; they will be designedto enhance social engagement and cultural expression – incorporating,for example, water-art features – and the establishment ofbiodiversity in terrestrial and aquatic corridors.Assuming that the three pillars are now in place, there remainquestions of implementation. Some broad observations follow.Greenfield implementation of WSUD is the ‘express’ pathway totransforming our cities and towns; but there is often an ingrainedconservatism in greenfield development. A reluctance to takeresponsibility for innovation leads to avoidance of the challengealtogether, so that old structures are replicated – forcing retrofittingin the long term. Furthermore, retrofitting to implementinstitutional and material change for WSUD is always problematic;but very often there is no alternative. In the end, thebest of greenfield and the best of retrofitting options must beused harmoniously; they go hand-in-hand for a truly integratedapproach to the organic renewal of cities. To achieve this integration,accurate policy settings are essential. Policy that enables,not policy that micromanages, is a necessity for WSUD. Policythat micromanages in a direct attempt to solve complex problemsdefies the very definition of ‘policy’; the apolitical social-scien-tific and physical-scientific implementation of WSUDmust unequivocally be enabled, if there is to bedurable improvement.Developing countries, where infrastructure andinstitutions are not well established, are fortunatein at least two respects: retrofitting of a city isfrequently not an option, because material infrastructurefor water management may be either absent orapt for wholesale replacement; and the social infrastructureis often readier to accommodate the newWSUD strategies. It is imperative that internationalaid programmes avoid inadvertently exporting prejudicesthat inform traditional design of water systems.The greenfield opportunities afforded in developingcountries present substantial challenges, and thesemust be met with new thinking. In return, theyprovide opportunities for learning that can be appliedin developed countries.The nexus between food security and watersecurity is a salient concern in the urban context.Efficient use of natural resources, such as recoveryand recycling of water and nutrients, is vital forsecuring food production. Cities and towns are hometo 70 per cent of the world’s population, and vastlymore food is consumed in them than in rural areas– from which the bulk of food must be transported.Communities must bear responsibility for their inefficientconsumption of food, water and energy. Wethrow away more than 30 per cent of food produced;and we have scarcely begun to capture wastewaterfor appropriate reuse, let alone ‘waste heat’ fromelectricity production. Urban sewerage systemscarry substantial nutrient residues, and the recoveryof these will be important to sustaining productivelandscapes. Sewage treatment plants must becomeresource recovery plants. Transforming our citiestowards efficient consumption requires innovationand socio-technical synergies, starting with concertedefforts at behavioural change and community awareness.District-level trigeneration, reticulation of hotwater and the use of available heat for water disinfectionare simple examples of pioneering ‘catalytic’initiatives that exploit the water-energy nexus inurban development.The creation of productive landscapes emerges as akey to developing green urban infrastructure. Citiesare water catchments: in most Australian cities, thecombined stormwater and wastewater resourcesexceed the water consumption. These resources couldsupport greener cities for a multitude of liveabilityobjectives, including community gardens, orchardsand urban forests.The challenges of effective, equitable watermanagement are among the most serious that theworld community faces. Like problems of populationand climate change, they must be faced togetherby a free flow of experience and knowledge. Theseproblems belong to no community in isolation, andthe solutions must similarly be shared.[ 278 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERIntegrated urban water frameworks foremerging cities in sub-Saharan AfricaKala Vairavamoorthy, Seneshaw Tsegaye and Jochen Eckart,Patel College of Global Sustainability, University of South Florida, USAIt is widely accepted that one of the major challenges of thetwenty-first century is to provide safe drinking water andbasic sanitation for all. Presently, more than 1 billion peoplelack access to improved water sources, and over 2.6 billionpeople lack access to basic sanitation – and nearly all of thesepeople live in developing countries. In sub-Saharan Africa, watersupply coverage is around 61 per cent and access to improvedsanitation around 30 per cent. 1Providing adequate water supply and sanitation, particularly inurban areas, is a challenging task for governments throughout theworld. Already, half of the world’s population lives in cities, mostof which have inadequate infrastructure and resources to addresswater and wastewater management in an efficient and sustainableway. This task is made even more difficult due to predicteddramatic global changes. For example, climate change is predictedCurrent and future population in African cities exposed to droughtSource: World Bank, 2012to cause significant changes in precipitation patternsand their variability, affecting the availability of water;technological and financial constraints present challengesin maintaining and upgrading infrastructureassets to deliver water to all sectors while maintainingthe quality of water distributed to the various users;and population growth, urbanization and industrialactivities are leading to a dramatic increase in waterconsumption and wastewater discharge.Under the aforementioned circumstances, currentmodels of urban water management and their correspondinginfrastructure have already failed or areon the verge of collapse from the perspective of costeffectiveness, performance and sustainability. Hence,urbanizing areas are now faced with difficult futurestrategic decisions – do they continue business asusual following a conventional technical, institutionaland economic approach for water and sanitation? Ordo they look for a new paradigm?Sub-Saharan Africa is urbanizing faster than any othercontinent, and most of this urbanization is taking placein emerging towns and villages. 2 These areas have aunique, but fleeting opportunity to change the way theythink about water and how they develop their infrastructure.Further, these emerging urban areas often do nothave mature infrastructure and governance structures.These conditions create an opportunity to implementradically different urban water systems based on thekey principles of integrated urban water management(IUWM). IUWM principles include: resilience of urbanwater systems to global change pressures; interventionsover the entire urban water cycle; reconsideration of theway water is used (and reused); and greater applicationof natural systems for water and wastewater treatment.Critical to the implementation of IUWM principles isthe early and continuous integration of all stakeholdersin the decision-making and implementation process.Furthermore, institutional and governance changes arerequired to promote a more integrated approach tourban water management. Current trends suggest thatfuture water systems will shift from being linear (openloop) centralized systems to closed loop, semi-centralizedsystems that maximize opportunities for waterreuse and recycling, and the generation of energy andnutrients from used water.[ 279 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERA tailored integrated urban water framework for cities in sub-Saharan AfricaGroundwaterSurface waterRainwaterEvapotranspirationLeakageRainwater harvestingWatersupply Roof SurfacePublic tabConventional HHconnectionYard tabStormwatercollectionWastewaterrecycleToiletGreywaterreuseKitchenlaundry andbathroomCascadingIrrigationRunoffstoragePit latrineSeptictanksCrosscontaminationSewerInfiltrationExfiltrationOverflowInflowGroundwaterRecharge/infiltrationSubsurface flowReceiving waterSource: Vairavamoorthy et al, 2012A water framework for African citiesIUWM contextualizes the water sources, water supply, wastewaterand stormwater within an integrated urban water framework inorder to understand the dynamic interactions between the variouscomponents of the urban water system. Unfortunately, most existingintegrated frameworks, such as Urban Volume and Quality,Aquacycle or CityWaterBalance, are designed for the conditions ofcities in developed countries, neglecting the specific challenges ofcities in sub-Saharan Africa. Hence there is a need for an urban waterframework specifically designed for the cities in sub-Saharan Africa. 3An integrated framework designed for African cities has toconsider a number of water and sanitation practices characteristicof African cities. Water consumption conditions include the hugedisparity of water consumption, ranging from 40 to 255 litres perperson per day, depending on the type of service provision and thesocioeconomic status of the household. In addition tothese household consumption patterns, an integratedframework must capture the consumption from yardtaps, private wells, water kiosks and private watervendors. It must also account for a variety of differenton-site and off-site sanitation options such as pitlatrines, septic tanks and the (often missing) wastewatertreatment. The major impact poor sanitationhas on the pollution of potential water sources mustalso be accounted for. In most African cities adequatewater treatment is provided at the treatment plant, butthe potable water is contaminated in the distributionsystem. Intermittent supplies and low pressures encouragestagnancy and the entry of contaminants whichdeteriorate the microbiological water quality, resulting[ 280 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATEREstimated water demand and proposed water resources for Arua20,000= Water demand18,00016,00014,000Surface water (Dam at Enyau River)12,00010,0008,000Waste water reuse (Cluster 3, 4 and 5)Greywater (Cluster 6, 8 and 9)Greywater (Cluster 1, 2 and 7)6,000Surface water (upgrading abstraction from Enyau River)4,0002,000GroundwaterSurface water – Anyau River (existing operating capacity)0203220312030202920282027202620252024202320222021202020192018201720162015201420132012Source: Vairavamoorthy et al, 2012in huge public health risks. Finally, there is cascading use of wastewaterfor irrigation of urban agriculture, a common practice in manycities in sub-Saharan Africa. The cascading use of wastewater has theadvantage that the scarce water resources are used multiple times,but it increases public health risks by spreading the pathogens inthe wastewater. The integrated framework designed for sub-SaharanAfrica must explore solutions for safe cascading use of wastewaterfor urban agriculture.Because the infrastructure is often different in sub-Saharan Africathan in developed countries, many water demand management measuresthat are applicable in the latter cannot be implemented in thesedeveloping countries. 4 An integrated urban water framework designedspecifically for African cities must recognize these differences and thelimitations they create. For example, many African cities have a very oldwater distribution infrastructure which creates leakage levels of 30-50per cent. Under these conditions, leakage management programmesprovide a huge opportunity for IUWM in African cities. Unfortunately,when the water supply is intermittent and distribution pressures arelow, many water-saving devices for toilets, bathrooms and kitchensmay not be effective. Further, in water-scarce conditions where thepopulation already uses water efficiently, the potential for further watersavingmeasures is limited. An IUWM framework designed specificallyfor African conditions must select technologies which are suitable forthe conditions in African cities. For example, treatment technologieswhich could not work with intermittent energy supply (such as activatedsludge) are not applicable and more robust technologies such asstabilization ponds should be applied.By improving the understanding of the highly complex interactionsbetween the different parts of the African urban water cycle, an IUWMframework designed for Africa facilitates a structured and integratedanalysis and supports an integrated decision-making process.IUWM strategies for AruaAlthough the integrated framework may seemstraightforward, its application on the ground is challenging.The new integrated approach to urban watermanagement has been applied in a recently preparedfeasibility study for Arua, Uganda, funded by theWorld Bank. 5 Comparable concepts are proposedfor feasibility studies in Mbale, Uganda and Nairobi,Kenya. Arua is a rapidly emerging town located innorthern Uganda. It is experiencing a critical shortageof water and the main water source, the EnyauRiver, is affected by the increasing water demandsof upstream users, exacerbating the water shortageproblem. The current water supply is not sufficientto meet the existing demand, and with an estimatedpopulation growth of up to 200 per cent in the next20 years the problem will increase. In addition tothe water shortage problem, Arua also lacks adequatesanitation provisions, with dysfunctional pit latrines,open defecation and untreated wastewater posingboth health risks and water pollution risks. In orderto cope with these challenges, a feasibility study forfuture water supply and sanitation was developedapplying the integrated framework.Based on the integrated framework, the feasibilitystudy proposes that in Arua surface water,groundwater, artificial aquifer recharge and recycledwastewater (grey and black) should all be consideredas potential water sources, resulting in increasedwater security (security by diversity). This strategyincludes changing the way we think and the way we[ 281 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERThe geographic location of Arua town, UgandaSudanARUACongo, DRCUgandaTanzaniaRwandaSource: Vairavamoorthy et al, 2012Emerging technologies that maximize opportunities for water reuseand recycling from used waterKenyaImage:Aqua Services and Engineering, 2013build infrastructure. We need a change in mindsetabout wastewater; we should stop viewing it aswaste and a burden, but rather see it as a resourcethat could be effectively utilized to augment watersources. And building a decentralized system forwastewater recycling, using innovative options suchas the Decentralized Wastewater Treatment System 6and Soil Aquifer Treatment, can both improvesanitation and generate additional water sources.Decentralized systems allow water to be used andreused closer to where it is produced and whereit is needed. Decentralized systems can also lowerenergy demand and reduce operational and maintenancecosts, making them especially well suited toconditions in sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, thedecentralized treatment options and the resultingclusters optimize the adaptive capacity of the emergingurban space by allowing infrastructure growthto be staged in a way that traces the urban growthtrajectory more carefully. The IUWM strategy alsopromotes the development of a strong watershedprotection plan where the needs and wishes of allupstream and downstream stakeholders in the watershedare considered.It is possible that this IUWM strategy could providesufficient water resources to meet the increasingdemand in the next 20 years. Allocation of the differentwater resources is prioritized from a cost-benefitperspective. The feasibility study estimates that forArua, the average unit costs for the proposed IUWMscenario are US$0.57 per cubic metre, while the unitcosts for the traditional approach of using water fromconventional surface water sources 20 km away isUS$0.74 per cubic metre.A unique opportunityIn conclusion, we need to recognize that global changepressures will affect our ability to manage urban waterin the city of the future. We all live, and our citiesexist, in a rapidly changing environment. The thinkingbehind much urban planning today predates thesechanges and the time has come to think fresh! Wecannot continue investing in water infrastructure thatis unsuited to future societal needs. At the same timewe have to find new ways of catering for more people,with more needs, with the same quantity of water. Allthis has to be achieved while reducing our ecologicalfootprints. This complicated challenge calls for a realparadigm shift in urban water management. In emergingurban areas in Africa where water infrastructureis still in its infancy, there is a unique but fleetingopportunity to implement radically different urbanwater systems based on the principles of IUWM. Theconclusion from the Arua case study is that IUWMis a powerful approach to managing freshwater andwastewater (and stormwater), and provides the potentialto satisfy the water needs of communities at thelowest cost while minimizing adverse environmentaland social impacts.[ 282 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERWater resources management onthe island of Crete: lessons learnedE. Baltas, Associate Professor, School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University of Athens;and O. Tzoraki, Assistant Professor, School of Environment, University of AegeanThe island of Crete has limited water resources andgrowing water demands. Therefore, an important goal ofwater resources management on the island is to achievea hydrological balance and promote understanding in the localcommunity about the problem of water shortage. Lack of cooperationamong Crete’s several water authorities, institutions andservices has often meant that water issues enter a ‘labyrinth’, buta process of stakeholder participation at all stages of managementplan creation has resulted in a real influence on policydesign and implementation. In addition to effective cooperationamong end users, measures such as managed aquifer recharge,village connection to wastewater treatment plants, ecologicalriver flow, erosion elimination and flood control are now beingconsidered to prevent drought and ecological problems.In Mediterranean countries and especially in Greece, demand on freshwater is continuously increasing due to population growth, improvingliving standards and economic development. 1 The fact that the majorityof rainfall events occur during the autumn and winter months, andthat water demand increases during the summer, creates adiscrepancy between water supply and demand. The smalldrainage areas in many Greek islands, in combinationwith high slopes and restricted rainfall volumes, result inthe desiccation of rivers and wetlands during the summer.Common measures in the face water shortage includedam construction, river abstractions and overexploitationof groundwater. 2 The threat of seawater intrusion prohibitsthe use of existing, near-shore aquifers. At the sametime, climate change has limited water resource availability.The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changeexpects that by 2050,the annual average river flow willhave decreased by 10-30 per cent over some dry regions atmid-latitudes and semi-arid low latitudes. 3 Consequently,extended areas of southern Europe are going to sufferfrom water stress and desertification. These complexitiesare posing great challenges to decision makers and watermanagers who are working to maintain both economicdevelopment and environmental protection.Mean annual precipitation on the island of CreteSource: Ministry of Environment, 2013[ 283 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATERCrete faces limited natural water supply and increased seasonaldemand, especially in the summer for agricultural and touristicuse. A key issue of concern is the allocation of water resourcesto ensure sufficient water for all demands. During recent decadesseveral hydraulic projects such as reservoirs and water pipe systemshave been constructed to serve water needs, drastically altering thenatural regime of rivers and aquifers. There is a conflict betweenusers’ demand and the rational use and protection of the island’sexisting water resources.The island of CreteGreece covers an area of 130,000 km 2 in the Mediterranean regionin the south of Europe. The island of Crete occupies the southernpart of Greece with an area of 8,265 km 2 and is divided into fourprefectures: Lassithi (1,810 km 2 ), Heraklion (2,626 km 2 ), Rethymno(1,487 km 2 ) and Chania (2,342 km 2 ). Agricultural areas cover 37.9per cent of the island (3,134 km 2 ). Permanent trees (mostly oliveand orange trees) occupy 1,901 km 2 , arable land 300 km 2 , vegetablesand other horticultural crops 86 km 2 , grapes and raisins 255km 2 , and 592 km 2 is fallow land. The permanent population ofthe island is 601,131. 4 In 2006, the livestock population on theisland was counted as 2,000 heads of cattle, 65,000 pigs, around 1.3million sheep, 635,000 goats, 6,000 horses, over 1 million heads ofpoultry, 544,000 rabbits and 158,000 beehives.Four mountain ranges run west to east: the White mountains inthe west (2453 m), Idis mountain (2,456 m) in the centre, Asterousia(1,280 m) in south Irakleion and Dikti (2,148 m) in the east. Thegeology of Crete is comprised of limestone, which allows water topenetrate, creating major karstic formations. 5 Crete stands on theverge of the tectonic trough of the Mediterranean and the Aegeanvolcanic bow, giving the island high seismic activity.Crete has a typical Mediterranean climate with cool winters and hotsummers. The mean annual temperature ranges from 18.5 o C in theWater storage in ancient Greece: an ancient courtyard with acistern in the foregroundImage: www.minoancrete.com/chamaizi.htmwest side to 20 o C in the south of the island. Precipitationpatterns are highly varied, with mean precipitationranging from 327 mm in coastal areas to 2,161 mm in theheadwaters of the White mountains. 6 The highest precipitationis observed in the mountains, with much less onthe north coast of the Chania prefecture and south partof Irakleion. During recent decades a decreasing trend inannual precipitation has been observed, with the largestreductions in higher elevations. 7The combination of the Cretan mountainous relief,complex geology, long coastline and the remotenessof some biotopes has led to great diversity and theexistence of many endemic and rare animal and plantspecies. The national Woodland of Samaria (4,850 ha)has been categorized as a Biosphere Reserve by theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization, and was awarded a European Diploma ofProtected Areas (Category A) by the Council of Europe.In 1994, a survey by the Greek Biotope/Wetland Centrerecorded 37 biotopes including 14 river estuaries, onespring, one lake, six wetlands, nine rivers, three artificiallakes and three sealakes. Many sites in Cretehave been included in the Natura 2000 network andmany national and European projects have targeted theprotection, restoration and sustainable management ofthese areas. A key issue of Cretan ecological protectionis the safeguarding of its water resources.Water management in the pastIn ancient times, water supply was covered by springand river water and shallow groundwater. Water storagewas achieved by a dense system of drainage networksand cisterns. The complicated water supply and sewagesystem of the Palace of Knossos was greatly admiredin prehistoric Crete, even though most of its featureswere destroyed and little is known about its main operation.Some hypotheses assume that this system is thecomplicated labyrinth mentioned in the Greek myths oflater periods. Aqueducts of gravity-flow and pressurepipedsystems were designed in the palace, revealinga deep knowledge of water management techniques.In the palace of Phaistos, terracotta pipes were in use,comprising one of the earliest applications of hydrostaticlaw in communication vessels. 8Today’s water resources balanceA mean annual precipitation of 934 mm corresponds toa water volume of 7,700 hm 3 . Due to high temperaturesit is estimated that almost 72 per cent (5,544 hm 3 ) ofthe rainwater is subject to evapotranspiration, with only12.5 per cent generating surface flow (962 hm 3 ) and15.5 per cent (1,194 hm 3 ) filtering into the soil. 9 Anestimated 593 hm 3 of groundwater enters the surfaceflow as spring water. The major springs are found inthe north-west part of Crete (maximum recorded flow6,000 m 3 /hr) in contrast to the south-east part, wheresprings flow at 15-70 m 3 /hr.Annual freshwater needs in the Cretan region reach515 hm 3 . Of this, human water supply demands around[ 284 ]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WATER65 hm 3 while 6.2 hm 3 is for livestock, 440 hm 3 for agriculture, 0.9hm 3 for olive mills and 3.2 hm 3 for industrial purposes. Around thehalf (46 per cent) of the total water requirement is requested bythe Irakleion prefecture. The available water volume on an annualbasis is estimated to be 372 hm 3 , leaving a water deficit of about143 hm 3 . Increased water demand for agricultural use on the island,(approximately 85 per cent of water use) cannot always be met. 10Great efforts have been made to promote rational use of water bythe agricultural sector, even though irrigated water exceeds 500 mmannually (a mean rate for agriculture).Groundwater resources in Crete are overexploited, especially inthe Messara aquifer in South Irakleion where an estimated 51 hm 3of water is extracted each year, exceeding aquifer yield by 10 hm 3 . 11Nowadays water needs are covered by a dense network of pipes thattransfer water from springs, reservoirs and groundwater bodies tovillages and coastal cities. For instance in the Rethimno prefecturethe Potami dam, with a reservoir capacity of 23 hm 3 , covers theirrigation needs of the Amari valley. A substantial amount of wateris reused and becomes available for agricultural and urban needs.Eight of the 18 domestic wastewater treatment plants in Crete reusewater to satisfy agricultural water needs. In addition, during recentyears, desalination technology has started to be used for obtainingsmall quantities of water for domestic supply, although this is recognizedas a very expensive solution.Issues of water management, spatial planning and agriculture werehistorically administered by distinct organizational bodies such asthe Eastern Crete Development Organization and the Western CreteDevelopment Organization, the municipalities, water associationsand several local land reclamation services without any cooperationbetween them. The main problem was that the western partof the island experiences water surplus and the eastern part suffersfrom water deficit, but the administrative structures were not organizedin a way that allowed water transfer from the one part of theisland to the other. Many environmental problems have arisen dueto water deficit, such as seawater intrusion into the coastal aquifer,river dryness, lowering of groundwater levels in many valleys, andThe main springs in Crete and their maximum recorded dischargeSource: IGME, Water Points Recording – Crete Water District (2009)related ecological problems such as the loss of endemicbiodiversity and increased salinity of fresh water. Cretanwetlands are currently under threat due to overexploitationof water resources. Coastal marshes in particularare endangered as a result of the expansion of urbanand touristic settlements. 12 In order to minimize thewater shortage problem, effective cooperation is necessaryamong the different water use sectors, as well asamong the communities which belong to differentbasins. Especially in cases where hydraulic works haveto be conducted for transferring water from one regionto another, approaches are needed to convince the localcommunities involved.In the past, environmental issues arising fromwater management were not acknowledged as themain responsibility of any water-related organization.However, the adoption of the European UnionWater Framework Directive in national legislationushered in the creation of water districts. Crete isrecognized as WD13 and the responsibility for watermanagement belongs to the Water Department of theDecentralized Administration of Crete. The preparationof river basin management plans and suggestedprogrammes of measures are under public consultationat the time of writing, especially actions focusedon preventing drought, which Crete faces quite often,and flood. Public participation is a prerequisite in allstages of management plan creation, so all interestedparties are actively involved. Even water authoritieswhich were inexperienced in participatory andcooperative forms of governance have supervisedseveral stakeholder groups. The main outcome ofthis participatory process has been effective linkagesbetween the various water use sectors. Some forms ofinteraction and cooperation were generated betweenassociations managing irrigation water and publicwater supply services. Public awareness resultedin a deeper understanding of water issues, 13 allowingwater allocation from the west to the east partof Crete. Current policies identify the maintenanceof domestic and municipal water supply as the firstpriority, followed by agricultural needs. Perennialcrops are the first priority of the agricultural sector,ahead of seasonal vegetables.Towards sustainable managementCrete is moving towards the sustainable managementof existing water resources with the aim of achievingmaximum yields and optimal utilization. Balancingdemand and supply is an important goal in light of thelimited available resources and growing demand in theurban and touristic sectors. Measures such as managedaquifer recharge, village connections to wastewatertreatment plants, river ecological flow, erosion eliminationand flood control should be taken to preventecological problems. Cooperation among the differentwater use sectors and the communities which belong todifferent basins will help to minimize the water shortageproblem.[ 285 ]
VIIIInternationalCooperation on WaterSciences and Research
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHUnderstanding the Global WaterSystem for Water CooperationSina Marx and Anik Bhaduri, Global Water System Project, International Project Office, Bonn, GermanyThe imperative to strive for more cooperation in waterissues lies in the very nature of the resource: water is notonly an irreplaceable and non-substitutable resource, butit is also vital to all aspects of human development and ecosystems.As a universal solvent, water is the thread that links allaspects of human and natural systems. 1Global environmental changes which affect these complex systemswith added uncertainties call for cooperation to find integrated andcoordinated responses. A large number of these global changes areman-made. The impacts of human action on the natural processes ofour planet are in fact so immense that a number of scholars argue wehave entered a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene. The termexpresses the notion that nowadays humankind can be counted asa global force in its own right, and therefore must be consideredas a key driver to the future development of all living species –including ourselves. The paradox of this situation is that we tend toinduce these major global changes without adequate knowledge ofthe systems we are manipulating.Global changes call for new and integrated forms of cooperation – such as the jointmanagement of land and water resources for future generationsImage: UN Photo/Martine PerretTherefore, after a long tradition of focusing on local orregional processes in water research, there is increasingrecognition of the importance of properly understandingthe dynamics as well as its different elements and components.Besides the physical and biogeochemical elements,humans play a major role impacting the system by withdrawingwater for household consumption, industries,food and energy as well as adding external matter to thewater, such as fertilizers and pesticides from agricultureor waste water from cities and industries. Moreover,we are changing the course and flow of rivers throughinfrastructure development. Despite these massiveinterventions, we are still lacking sufficient water supplyto satisfy our basic needs and human rights and willcontinuously have to struggle in order to achieve this,given the increasing demands on global water resourcesto meet consumptive, industrial and agricultural waterneeds. Similarly, feeding the growing population of ourplanet and enabling a dignified life for everyone cannotbe accomplished without achieving water security forboth humans and nature through a massive increase insustainable cooperation toward this end.To facilitate the cooperation required for global watersecurity, we need more knowledge on how to managethe global water system: “A prerequisite for selecting theright way to intervene is to know enough to act wisely”. 2The Global Water System Project (GWSP) wasestablished in 2004 as a long-term research projectto understand the role of human induced changes tothe water cycle that had become global in magnitude.Through multi- and interdisciplinary cooperationbetween researchers, the aim of GWSP was to promotethe understanding of the manifold connections, bothwithin the global water cycle and with other socioecologicalsystems. Such knowledge is required to enablesocieties to properly respond to these changes in workingtowards water security. An understanding of the watersystem is also pertinent in terms of water cooperation,since the global connections between different sectors,scales and actors and the challenges arising from globalchange call for new forms of cooperative arrangements.After nearly a decade of global water research withinGWSP, it has become apparent that such new formsof cooperation need to include improved monitoringof resources, cooperation between sciences and disciplinestowards global assessments of the state of natural[ 288 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHresources, and the sharing of information and data on all levels –including the global scale.For instance, a recent GWSP study 3 on global threats to humanwater security and river biodiversity found that almost 80 per centof the world’s population faces high levels of water security threat.Immense technological investments enable rich states to counterbalancethese threats without acting upon the root causes, whereas lesswealthy countries remain exposed and vulnerable. Similarly, biodiversityis jeopardized by a lack of preventive action. The frameworkdeveloped by Charles Vörösmarty, and others, helps to prioritizepotential cooperative responses to this crisis in terms of policy,management and governance.From a governance perspective, new forms of multidimensionalcooperation are needed – between sectors of industries and services,between and within nation states and non-governmental institutions– to provide water security for everybody, without jeopardizing thenatural resource base on which the world depends.However, while it is easy to call for cooperation, in reality, effectiveand sustainable cooperation on the management of resources can behard to achieve. This is particularly the case when adequate knowledgeof the processes needed to establish such cooperative behaviour indifferent settings is lacking. In the past, universal remedies, both tech-The Bonn Declaration on Global Water SecurityThe water community assembled in Bonn for the GWSP Conference “Waterin the Anthropocene” in May 2013, urged a united front to form a strategicpartnership of scientists, public stakeholders, decision- makers and theprivate sector. The declaration calls for more cooperation in order todevelop a broad, community-consensus blueprint for a reality-based, multiperspective,and multi-scale knowledge-to-action water agenda.Global assessments are needed to properly understand anthropogenic andenvironmental changes in the water cycleImage: NASAnical and managerial, were often applied to very diverselocations, irrespective of whether or not they fitted thespecific situation. The most influential paradigm for thecooperative management of water resources today, namelyIntegrated Water Resource Management (IWRM), is agreat step towards integrating complexity in water management.However, the priorities for implementing IWRM arestill often generalized, without explicitly taking differencesinto account. For instance, setting up integrated river basinmanagement plans might not be practicable for countrieswith limited institutional capacities.This discrepancy between theory and feasibility inimplementation is one reason why IWRM has fallen shortof initial expectations. To overcome these difficulties,one has to examine the potential forms of cooperationwhich are best suited in different settings while takinginto account that the values and priorities associated withwater and development vary tremendously between societies.Therefore, the relevant issue is to identify the factorsand circumstances that induce or encourage cooperation.While the public debate over competing needs anddemands for international water resources largelyfocuses on the extreme of ‘water wars’ as opposed to‘water cooperation’, there is a much wider variety inthe forms and levels of potential cooperative behaviourbetween actors than those two aspects. The spectrumof cooperation ranges from sharing data and informationto the joint management of a water resource.Especially in the case of transboundary rivers, onehas to recognize that the benefits for nation statesdo not necessarily increase with the level of cooperation.4 Cooperation also comes at a cost, and there is aneed to identify conditions where the benefits of suchcooperative behaviour outweigh its costs. The potentialcosts and benefits also depend on physical, socialand economic factors which differ from basin to basin.However, little is known about how water governanceand management systems perform in different socioeconomicand environmental contexts.To close this gap, the Twin2Go project endorsed byGWSP conducted a comparative analysis of complex watergovernance and management systems in 29 river basinsaround the globe. It was found that forms of governancewith polycentric cooperative arrangements show the bestperformance – that is, those governance structures whichfavour the sharing of power between different centreswithout losing the coordination between them. Thedistribution among several centres enables more flexibleresponses that fit the specific situation and place of action,which makes it easier to deal with uncertainties.Such studies can help to make adaptive governanceof river basins work in the sense of an IWRM. However,IWRM conceptually assumes cooperative behaviourbetween stakeholders without further questioningwhether cooperation actually exists, or whether it is desirablefor a certain actor. Cooperation is a prerequisite forgood water governance but it cannot be taken for granted.While new theories in economics have shown that theexploitation of shared resources, in the sense of a Tragedy[ 289 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHof the Commons, is by no means a universal phenomenon, the notionthat human beings as well as nation states are interested in maximizingtheir respective benefits cannot be ignored. Therefore one has totake into account the respective costs and benefits of cooperating on ashared water resource to be able to assess in which cases cooperativebehaviour is worthwhile for a certain actor. In the case of transboundaryriver basins, it might actually be more beneficial to the upstreamriparian not to cooperate at all, since cooperation might imply gettingless water from a river than before in order to increase the availableamount of water for a downstream country. Likewise, the existence ofcooperative measures as such is not necessarily a ‘good thing’. In termsof implementation, cooperative agreements need to be examined moreclosely as to whether they actually help in achieving the goals they havebeen put up for. Likewise, if a cooperative arrangement clearly favoursone party over the other, non-cooperation could be the better optionwith regard to benefits for the disadvantaged party.However, the cost of non-cooperation regarding natural resourcemanagement in terms of degradation or water scarcity can beimmense, and negative effects often transcend international borders.Given that transboundary basins and aquifers are essential to thelivelihoods of hundreds of millions of people, water creates mutualdependencies across societies, countries and continents which oftennecessitate cooperation.So how to overcome a situation in which non-cooperation seemsmore desirable for an actor than cooperation? One solution can beto talk about overall benefits from cooperation on water issues ratherthan about mere water quantities. Approaches that focus on the collectivebenefits that users receive from water sharing can thus be morefruitful in stimulating cooperation than negotiating about water allocationalone. Issue linkage is the notion that if two sides cannot reachan agreement when negotiating on one issue, adding a second issuefor a simultaneous discussion increases the probability of agreement.Therefore, cooperation on transboundary rivers can be strengthenedwhen taking into account more than the issue of water use alone.Therefore, issue linkage can prevent non-cooperative behaviourby broadening a country’s range of options and contributes tobalancing uneven ‘power’ potentials.As mentioned above, the public debate has often discussedwhether the wars of this century will be fought over water ratherthan over oil. However, as Aaron Wolf and others famouslyshowed, cooperation over water exceeds conflict by far and waterwars have barely ever been recorded within the last thousands ofyears. Research findings both of GWSP and others also suggest thatwater cooperation can be a starting point for cooperation in otherareas, preventing political conflict and strengthening ties betweencommunities and nation states. Nevertheless, the above statementthat there are no wars being fought over water does obviously notmean that there is no conflict or suffering due to increasing waterstress. Rather, the accelerating and competing demands for waterresources and the growing uncertainties due to global environmentalchanges necessitate cooperation more than ever.Effective water cooperation does not only mean bringing togetherthose actors that need to cooperate, but similarly knowing which issuesneed to be aligned. A joint discussion of issues that belong togetherbut are usually not discussed as such might in turn require bringingtogether different actors than before. Recent global assessments haverevealed several issues that need to be discussed in a cooperative andjoint manner: we urgently need more collaboration to address water,food and energy issues in an integrated way as well as a joint approach toBenefit sharing through issue linkagein the Volta BasinInterdependency and issue linkage can lead to mutual benefitsRecent studies on transboundary rivers show in which way issuelinkages – for example of water and energy – can improvecooperation between upstream and downstream riparians. Acase study 6 on transboundary water sharing between BurkinaFaso and Ghana, the major upstream and downstream countriesin the Volta River Basin, illustrates that the interdependency ofriparians can lead to mutual benefits if more issues than wateruse are taken into account.While Ghana gets the chance to increase the currentlylimited amount of water used for agricultural purposes,Burkina Faso benefits from cheaper energy from hydropoweras a compensation for constraining its water consumption.In this case, collective benefits of issue linkages of waterand energy can result in improved welfare for both countries,making a sustainable cooperation commonly advantageous.manage land and water resources. These issues need to betaken into account when framing the policies of tomorrow.Today the world is committed to creating a set ofsustainable development goals (SDGs). However, thistask is particularly difficult in the area of water, consideringthe magnitude of human activities transforming theglobal water system. We know that competition for waterbetween societal needs and ecosystem demands will intensifyin the future. At the same time, securing water for othervital human needs such as food and energy production, aswell as safeguarding the quality and quantity of water forthe ecosystem, should not be neglected in pursuance ofwater supply and sanitation goals. Thus, while framing theSDGs, there is further need for knowledge to understandhow to safeguard the global water system on which thewelfare of current and future generations depends and toestablish stategic partnerships to this end, as called for inthe Bonn Declaration.Last but not least, from the perspective of a decade ofglobal water research, financial resources for research,capacity building and education are a key element to facilitatewater cooperation and a fruitful relationship betweenscience and policy. Facing global change, this relationshipmust become a collaborative partnership of mutual learningto meet today’s and future challenges. What is neededis ‘managing to learn in order to learn to manage’. 5Image: UN Photo/Logan Abassi[ 290 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHA use-inspired approach tosustainable water managementOmar Osman, Vice-Chancellor; Kamarulazizi Ibrahim, Director, Professor; Kanayathu Koshy,Professor of Sustainability, Centre for Global Sustainability Studies; Ismail Abustan, Professor,School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Sains MalaysiaIn a world threatened by climate change and a burgeoningglobal population, government alone cannot addressthe challenges arising from increasing demand for wateraccess. Universities must play a key role by helping governmentsdetermine how to manage and allocate water resourcesand provide water services. Recognizing this, Universiti SainsMalaysia (USM) has been taking proactive measures to playits part, focusing on research initiatives and education-basedcapacity-building. USM’s approach to water research is guidedby the identified sustainability challenges that a wide spectrumof water users is currently experiencing. Our research is proactivelydesigned to be need-based and is inspired by the goal ofputting the results to immediate use in finding solutions.There follows an account of USM’s experiences in integratedapproaches to river and stormwater management, modelling forscenario generation 1 and our ongoing Polar Research Initiative,polar@USM. 2 These illustrate the need for science and values-baseddecision-making for people-centred water cooperation as a newparadigm for integrated water management.BackgroundEnsuring the free flow of water for all is a major sustainabilitychallenge that is felt across the world. In orderto manage one of the most crucial natural resourcesfor human survival effectively and to ensure the “waterfuture we want” the United Nations Conference onSustainable Development was held in Rio in 2012.Here, the global community “reaffirmed the commitmentmade in the Johannesburg Plan of Implementationand the Millennium Declaration regarding halving by2015 the proportion of people without access to safedrinking water and basic sanitation and the developmentof integrated water resource management andwater efficiency plans, ensuring sustainable wateruse.” 3 By declaring 2013 the International Year ofWater Cooperation, the United Nations has specificallyacknowledged the urgency of mainstreaming “waterand sanitation as a sustainable development goal thatcorresponds and responds to multidimensional challenges.”4 UN-Water has called upon the United NationsImage: REDAC USMBIOECODS approaches to integrated water management[ 291 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) tolead the International Year of Water Cooperation activities.Despite the vital importance of water to life on Earth, there aremajor gaps in our understanding of water availability, quality anddynamics, and of the impact of global changes on water systems.Through place-based research and integrative modelling, USM hasbeen pursuing education- and research-based capacity-building andpolicy interactions to enhance our understanding of water systemand land use changes, the built environment, ecosystem functionsand services and climate change and variability, and to predict howeach of these will impact the others.Flooding is the most common natural disaster encountered inMalaysia. Both monsoon floods and flash floods are frequent. TheDepartment of Irrigation and Drainage in Malaysia has estimated thatabout 29,000 km 2 (9 per cent of the total land area) and more than4.82 million people (22 per cent of the population) are affected byflooding annually. The damage caused by flooding is estimated to beabout RM 915 million (£160 million). Monsoon floods are caused bylong durations of heavy rainfall, but more localized flooding, whichoccurs especially in newly developed town areas, is part of the dynamicsof the built environment. The River Engineering and Urban DrainageResearch Centre (REDAC), the School of Engineering, the Schoolof Biology, the Geography Department, and the Centre for GlobalSustainability Studies (CGSS) are among the sections of USM currentlyactive in the research and capacity-building area of water management.In order to facilitate international cooperation, since 2004, REDAC hasbeen holding a triennial international conference on rivers. 5Use-inspired research for water cooperationIntegrated river management, stormwater management andcomputer modelling are three areas of active research at USM.Integrated river managementThe sustainable management of Malaysia’s waterways is a centralissue for national development. Various users of river water want toprioritize it for their own purposes, resulting in competingdemands. This inevitably creates complex pressureson the water system, and integrated approaches arerequired to find solutions. Government has traditionallybeen responsible for managing rivers, but increasinglythe public, non-governmental organizations, industrialists,farmers and other stakeholders are also playinggreater roles. In a 2005 paper, Weng explains at lengththe need for the involvement of multiple players whoare strategic, need-based and inspired by a vision forfinding practical solutions to water issues. 6 Wengproposes ‘PEOPLE’ as an acronym standing for theingredients necessary for integrated river managementto work most effectively: Public participation;Environmental conservation; Ordeals; Politics andpollution; Learning; Equity; and Economics. He thenexpands on each of these elements, citing numerousexamples of existing problems and of ongoing projectsin sustainable river management. The important pointhere is that the involvement of multiple players has tobe strategic, need-based and inspired by a vision forfinding practical solutions to water issues.In Malaysia, natural and man-made waterwaysare interconnected, especially in the more developedareas of Peninsular Malaysia. They includethe various river systems, of which there are 89 inPeninsular Malaysia, 22 in Sarawak and 78 in Sabah; 7several artificial water infrastructures consisting oflarge lakes such as Kenyir Lake and Temenggor Lakein Terengganu; and many smaller ponds, swalesand urban drainages. Water from all these sourcesmust support agriculture, domestic and other industrialuses as well as various engineering projectssuch as hydroelectric and wastewater treatment. Tohelp meet this challenge, USM researchers from theImage: REDAC USMModelling for digital flood mapping, erosion and sediment control in Malaysia[ 292 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHbiological sciences, humanities and engineering schools, particularlyREDAC and CGSS, have been working on:• flood forecasting, digital mapping, risk studies andflood mitigations• simulation of tsunami currents, for example Merbok Estuaryin Kedah• assisting government agencies like the Department ofDrainage Malaysia on water issues such as preparing thenew version of MSMA, the Urban Storm Water ManagementManual for Malaysia• rehabilitation of degraded and polluted rivers• sustainable urban drainage systems• community-based vulnerability and adaptation to floodand food security (Kuala Nerang, Kedah).An integrated and sustainable urban drainage system, known asBio-Ecological Drainage Systems (BIOECODS), was designedby REDAC and subsequently constructed in 2002 at the USMEngineering Campus in Penang to help address the issues of flashfloods, river pollution and water scarcity. 8Another important area of research concerns community-basedadaptation and disaster risk management (DRM) in response toclimate change-induced floods and food security issues. DRMmust be defined inclusively to cover both ‘rapid-onset, highimpact’events such as floods and ‘slow-onset, high-impact’disasters such as climate change and poverty. Recognizing thatmost present-day sustainable development (SD) challengesbelong to the latter category, CGSS conducted a communitybasedclimate adaptation and food security project in KualaNerang, Kedah, in Northern Peninsular Malaysia. This projectinvolved stakeholder consultation and capacity-building; assessmentof community vulnerability to flood-related food insecurityand prospects for adaptation to climate change; and communityempowerment through physical and process-based adaptationimplementation assistance. For the long term, a new pathwaythat connects DRM to SD (Neo DRM-SD) could be found thataddresses poverty, debilitating disasters and diseases, rapid lossof biodiversity, and depleting capital within an integrated andcooperative regime. 9Stormwater managementThe volume of stormwater, the timing of surges within the systemand the contaminants that stormwater may contain present the mostsevere challenges to urban water management. Other environmentalissues caused by stormwater include increased turbidity from erosion,habitat destruction and heightened seasonal variation in water levels.USM scientists have developed the BIOECODS integrated solution forsustainable urban drainage systems to address these multiple challenges.The application of several best management practice options includingswales, wet ponds, detention ponds and wetlands, allows BIOECODSto remove stormwater pollutants effectively. Bioecological swales targeturban rooftops and car parks, while underground bioecological detentionstorages and bioecological dry ponds help restore water quality. 10Computer modellingUSM has been working closely with Malaysian water authorities andstakeholder groups to provide them with water scenarios for thefuture. We are using a variety of computer modelling approaches tostudy issues relating to scour, sediment transport, land use changes,flood levels and tsunamis. The 2011 REDAC Profile 11includes examples such as scour modelling, integratedriver basin management, flood plain modelling andtsunami modelling.Scour modelling – using soft computing techniques suchas artificial neural networks, ANFIS and Gene expressionprogramming, researchers have modelled scour problemsand conducted training based on their findings.Integrated river basin management – geographicinformation system-assisted models have been usedfor water quantity (flood) and sediment yield fromthe catchment area of the Bukit Merah dam usingHEC-HMS and SWAT methodologies. The results showthat land-use projections through 2015 are suitable forflow but not for sediment yield. This has implicationsfor the management of the catchment, dam operationsand land management.Flood plain modelling – USM researchers often usecomputational and numerical models to predict waterflow and quality, sediment transport and toxic contaminantconcentration in river and estuarine basins andcatchment areas. For example, using modelling resultsfor flood levels along Sungai Selangor (~106 km long)and its flood plains between cross-section km 53 tokm 67, shows that the areas flooded are 736 and 889hectares for 50-year and 100-year floods respectively.Such river flood risk maps are useful for developmentplanning in the river basin. 12Tsunami modelling – USM researchers have modelledthe role of mangrove trees on the hydrodynamicprocesses of tsunami waves and studied the potentialeffects of tsunami waves from the South China Sea onthe east coast of Malaysia. 13Field research on water qualityImage: REDAC USM[ 293 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHUSM’s polar researchBeginning in 1983, Malaysia has strategically engaged within theUnited Nations General Assembly to ensure that Antarctica is recognizedand safeguarded as our common heritage on Earth. Malaysia’sinterest in Antarctica was rooted in the opportunity it provides forcooperative research of immense global scope in the areas of science,diplomacy, management of international space, earth system andcosmology studies, polar oceans and ice-core studies, southern oceanresearch, development of early warning systems and science for internationalcollaboration. The Malaysian Antarctic Research Programme(MARP) was established in November 1997 following negotiationsbetween Malaysia and New Zealand for bilateral scientific cooperation.In 2006, MARP extended its activities to the Arctic as well.MARP’s major research interest was to establish the interrelationshipbetween equatorial and polar regions when it comes tothe causes and effects of global warming, environmental changeand impacts on the aquatic microbial community. A number ofuniversities in Malaysia are cooperating in this area of work. MARPhas also been organizing seminars and workshops at the nationaland international levels to promote research and foster scientificcollaboration. The first biennial Malaysian International Seminar onAntarctica (MISA) was held at Universiti Malaya in May 2002. Thesixth MISA will be held from 8-9 October 2013 at Penang.During his visit to USM, Paul Berkman, Chair of the InternationalBoard for the Antarctic Treaty Summit, said that the Antarctic TreatyThe polar@USM team in actionImages: USM polar teamis often seen as a visionary precedent for governing the‘global common’ – that is, regions and resources beyondnational jurisdictions – and that it is also very important,with regard to the Arctic Ocean, to establish a process ofcontinuous policy development that explicitly promotescooperation and prevents discord.As a member of the MARP team, USM has shown greatdedication to realizing MARP’s objectives to increase thenation’s scientific capacity and research outputs. USMis privileged to have nine researchers who have been toAntarctica and two who have been to the Arctic. 14 At theinternational level, the Foundation Director of CGSS,Professor Datuk Seri Zakri Hamid, played a key role in thefiftieth anniversary Summit on Science-Policy Interactionsin International Governance at the Smithsonian Institutionin Washington DC in 2009. Through its participationCGSS@USM co-signed the ‘Forever Declaration’, one ofthe major outcomes of the summit. 15Cooperation through people-centereddecision-makingWater is our world’s most important natural resource.It makes our planet unique among other knownplanets. Given the multiple pressures on this invaluableresource, it is evident that in the future, watermanagement will have to be integrated, interdisciplinaryand people-centred in order to minimize therisk of water conflicts. Such conflict management willrequire scientific evidence and practical value judgementsto secure lasting solutions. Knowledge and skillsacquired through education and work experience willnot be sufficient, by themselves, for managing sustainabilityissues. We need in addition the ability to seeissues in perspective and to clarify and prioritize ourvalue systems before major decisions are made. In otherwords, we need to go beyond knowledge to understandingand wisdom in order to make balanced decisionsthat will accommodate multiple interests in a giveand-takemanner, fully realizing that in negotiatedsettlements there are always trade-offs. 16For example, we know that communities value waterfor various reasons, such as food, bathing, domestic andspiritual uses, recreation, drainage, irrigation, industrialproduction and waste removal. So long as supply anddemand are balanced, there is no conflict. When thedemand exceeds supply, tensions start. This has been thecase for millennia. What has changed is the scale: there aremany more people on Earth now, and we are approachingwater resource scarcity. This puts the various ‘water values’listed above into competition with one another, becauseallocating water resources to fulfil one value reduces theavailability of water for another. This is why we requirescientific evidence and practical value judgments to securelasting solutions, knowing where and how to prioritizeone value over another. 17 Decisions must be inclusive afterall views have been considered, and they must be taken inthe collective interest. We must always be open to furtheriterations of the process when there are clear changes instakeholder priorities.[ 294 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHKEI’s international collaborationon water-related researchTae Ho Ro, Eulsaeng Cho and Jun Hyun Park, Korea Environment InstituteThe Korea Environment Institute (KEI) is a leadingnational think tank on environmental policies and environmentalimpact assessment. KEI was established bythe Korean Government in 1993 as a public research institute.It has been at the heart of development of the environmentalagenda in Korea for the past 20 years. As part of the KoreaCouncil of Economic and Social Research Institutes underthe Prime Minister’s Office, KEI strives to be a world-classenvironment policy research institute pioneering a sustainablesociety. Through cutting-edge research and rigorous analysis,KEI is dedicated to providing future-oriented environmentpolicy research that can benefit humanity. KEI’s researchprogrammes focus on environmental economics, climatechange and air quality, environmental assessment, waterenvironment, natural resource conservation, land planning,resource circulation and environmental health.Building on its 20 years of experience in environment policyresearch, KEI has taken its work to a new level through internationaljoint research and partnerships. With a growing recognitionof the need for enhanced collaboration and coordinationbeyond the national level, KEI launched its GlobalStrategy Center (GSC) in June 2010 to extend its bodyof work to regional and global levels. GSC works asthe main implementing arm of KEI’s global partnershipand outreach activities, focusing especially on technicalcooperation and knowledge-sharing with developingcountries. It is intended that GSC will become a sustainabledevelopment cooperation hub, which will serve asa global gateway for KEI and provide a platform forjoint research and knowledge-sharing.Research activities: water resourcesIn recent years, the issue of water security has beendiscussed on the global political agenda, earningattention from national governments at the highestlevel. Recent events and discussions have highlightedthat water security issues have implications for developmentand poverty eradication. In particular, TheFuture We Want – the outcome document of theAs a sustainable development cooperation hub, GSC provide a platform for joint research and knowledge-sharingSource: KEI[ 295 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHImage: KEIIWMM on the Selenge River Basin: members of the joint partnership research team2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development(Rio+20) – called for the provision of universal coverage forsafe drinking water and adequate sanitation services. The globalcommunity is expected to meet again in 2015 to agree on thepost-2015 development agenda and define the sustainable developmentgoals (SDGs). In this upcoming SDG agenda, water isexpected to feature prominently.As part of KEI’s efforts to contribute to the global community,GSC aims to address water resource issues through coordinatedmultidisciplinary research using advanced information andnetworking systems. GSC is working to expand its analyticalwork internationally through its partnership research. Since 2004,KEI and the Economics and Trade Branch of the United NationsEnvironment Programme have entered into agreements with anumber of institutions including national training and researchinstitutes, regional organizations, universities, internationalorganizations and non-governmental organizations with a view toestablishing a collaborative Network of Institutions for SustainableA map of the Selenge River Basin projectSource: KEI, IGMAS, Baikal Institute of Nature ManagementDevelopment (NISD). These institutions play a leadingrole in helping countries address the challenges ofsustainable development by enhancing informationexchange, capacity building, outreach activities andthe dissemination of publications for sustainabledevelopment. Since the network was established, anumber of activities have been initiated by KEI.The Selenge River BasinOne of KEI’s key NISD partnership projects is theIntegrated Water Management Model (IWMM) on theSelenge River Basin, in collaboration with the Instituteof Geoecology of the Mongolian Academy of Science(IGMAS), the Baikal Institute of Nature Management(BINM) and the Siberian branch of the Russian Academyof Sciences. The objective of the project was to buildan IWMM that could serve as an important policy toolfor sustainable management of the water source of theSelenge River Basin. The project also aimed to contributeto the peaceful settlement of water-related disputeson local, regional and international levels by providinga systematic analysis of the growing problems in thebasin’s management.The research project was conducted over threephases. The first phase focused on collecting data toexamine the water quality of the Selenge River. 1 In thesecond phase, the transboundary water managementissues between Mongolia and the Russian Federationwere analysed. 2 The final phase of the project wasaimed at the development and proposal of an internationalcooperation project for an IWMM for theSelenge River Basin. 3 The project resulted in thedevelopment of a solid research partnership betweenKEI, IGMAS and BINM. Furthermore, the three yearsof intensive joint research activities contributed tothe enhancement of IGMAS and BINM’s researchcapacities. Currently, IGMAS and BINM are jointlyconducting follow-up activities for the transboundarydiagnostic analysis in the Baikal Basin.[ 296 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHResearchers from KEI and the Russian Academy of Sciences Far Eastern Branchin north-east AsiaJoint research in north-east AsiaKEI and the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciencesconducted joint research aimed at establishing an informationexchange system. This would enable the sharing of freshwaterenvironmental data to deal with transboundary environmentalproblems in the freshwater basins between neighbouring countriesin the region. 4 The research included situational analysis of environmentalprotection in the Primorskiy region and a field survey ofthe Kedrovaya River. The field survey aimed to establish a baselinefor comparing the aquatic ecosystems of Far-East Russia and Koreaby examining the ecological conditions of the Kedrovaya River,including the distribution of invertebrate fauna and other monitoringmeasurements. The research contributed to the standardizationof the biomonitoring methodology for international watercoursesystems in north-east Asia and systemization of the ecosystemhealth assessment methodology.In addition to the field survey, the research involved a comparativeassessment of the Korean and Russian environmentalassessment systems to contribute to the strengthening of transboundaryenvironmental governance issues in north-east Asia.The assessment identified some of the weaknesses of the environmentalassessment system in Russia and proposed developmentagendas for environmental monitoring and management in thecountry. These proposals included the enhancement of capacitiesfor environmental impact assessment (EIA), particularly in watermanagement. As part of its efforts to support the development ofEIA in Russia, KEI organizes EIA capacity building programmesand periodical transboundary EIA workshops to share best practicesand discuss cutting-edge development issues in EIA withinternational scholars.Reservoir management in EthiopiaKEI also launched the Ethiopian Water Resource Development NISDpartnership research project, with the University of Connecticut andthe Ethiopia Institute of Water Resources of Addis Ababa University,to expand its research work to the developing countries of Africa.The two-year project, conducted from January 2011 to December2012, includes two volumes of research publications, one focusingon sediment and reservoir control and the other on analysis of theexternal effects of climate change and downstream areas. 5Image: KEIThe project focused on the development of ahydro-economics model called the Soil and ReservoirConservation (S-RESCON) model. The S-RESCONapproach is based on the Reservoir Conservation Model(RESCON), which was developed jointly with the WorldBank and the University of Connecticut for the economicand engineering evaluation of alternative strategies formanaging sedimentation in storage reservoirs. UnlikeRESCON, which limits its main focus to reservoir sedimentationmanagement, S-RESCON extends its attentionto upstream soil conservation management. In the firstyear of the project, the S-RESCON model was applied tothe Koka Reservoir basin in Ethiopia. The Koka Reservoirwas established in 1959 as a result of the construction ofthe Koka Dam across the Awash River to supply hydropowerfor Addis Ababa. Its basin was selected as theresearch area for applying S-RESCON as the reservoir isthreatened by increasing sedimentation caused by environmentaldegradation.In the second year of the project, the research focusedon an integrated model of watershed and reservoirmanagement that incorporates externalities and futureclimate change with a view to proposing an adaptationscheme. The S-RESCON model was reinforced to addresssedimentation problems as soil from the upstreamagricultural land was being deposited in downstreamreservoirs. The S-RESCON model allowed researchersto consider the dynamic process between upstream soilloss and downstream sediment deposits. Furthermore,the model includes various climatic factors such as theamount of incoming flow, reservoir evaporation rate andstream flow variation. Based on these climatic factors, themodel simulates the effect of climate change on watershedmanagement. For the project, the model has been appliedto the Nile watershed, covering Egypt as the downstreamwatershed and Ethiopia as the upstream watershed.The major outcome of the research over the two-yearperiod is the development of the S-RESCON modelco-developed by KEI and the University of Connecticut.This model can be applied to any reservoir with sedimentationmanagement challenges, considering theeffect of climate change on watershed management.KEI is expected to apply the model to other sites in thedeveloping countries to propose a sustainable reservoirmanagement scheme. A database is under constructionfor collecting hydrological data on water resources inthe developing countries.Furthermore, among KEI’s efforts to share knowledgeand experience relating to water management, theEthiopian Water Resource Development Project alsoprovided a capacity building programme in Addis Ababa,Ethiopia. The programme, co-organized by KEI, theUniversity of Connecticut and Addis Ababa University,was designed to develop institutional capacities onclimate change, green growth and water management.The training workshop attracted decision makers andpublic officials from the Ministry of Water and Energy,Environmental Protection Authority, and researchers andwater practitioners from the various states in Ethiopia.[ 297 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHImage: KEIDecision makers, researchers and water practitioners from across Ethiopia attended the capacity building programme at Addis Ababa in 2011Technology for safe drinking waterIn the context of the Rio+20 agenda, the rights to water and sanitationwere explicitly recognized by the United Nations. Improvingaccess to water and sanitation in the developing countries isconsidered to be one of the key issues for sustainable development.However, despite various forms of aid and assistance from numerousorganizations worldwide, there is room for improvement in achievingthe Millennium Development Goal of halving the number ofpeople without access to safe drinking water.Among GSC’s efforts to contribute to sustainable developmentand water security in the developing countries, a new project wasinitiated jointly with the Korea Institute of Science and Technology(KIST) in 2012. 6 This ongoing project involves technical cooperationfor the development of appropriate technology to provide safedrinking water in the rural areas of the developing countries. Withthe growing recognition of Official Development Assistance (ODA)in Korea and the need to play a greater role (both in quantity andquality) to support the developing countries, GSC and KIST havedeveloped this pilot project with the objective to propose a newstrategic ODA implementation model for the Korean Government.One of the critical factors for the pilot project lies in the developmentof appropriate equipment based on membrane distillationtechnology for purifying the contaminated water. The prototype,which allows the elimination of heavy metals such as arsenic forsafe drinking water, is being developed in collaboration with theCenter for Water Resource Cycle at KIST. Furthermore, consideringthe nature of appropriate technology for the developing countries,the prototype aims for low-cost, quasi-permanent and self-energysustainingsolutions.In addition to the development of appropriate technology, theGSC research team is working to identify the pilot project areawhich can best fit the functioning environment of the prototype.The research will provide a pre-feasibility study to gather informa-tion about the target area, test logistics and addressdeficiencies in design and procedure before the applicationof membrane distillation technology. GSCintends to collaborate with its partner institutions inthe developing countries, specifically those in northAsia and south-east Asia such as Mongolia, Vietnamand Cambodia, to create a cooperative network for localenvironmental and socioeconomic assessment.In the next phase of the project, the research teamwill aim for two major objectives:• to expand the distribution of the prototype ona larger scale to other regions of the developingcountries• to develop a strategic ODA implementation modelwhich incorporates a systematic procedure to improveKorea’s ODA performance and contribute to the needsof the developing countries.Moving forwardGSC plans to carry out relevant water research whichwill form the basis for global partnership and aninternational research network. Creating sustainableapproaches for water-related issues and contributingtowards implementing internationally agreed agendasfor water in the developing countries requires researchand outreach activities in diverse forms. GSC aims toenhance international cooperation on water-relatedissues to provide viable, forward-looking solutionsfor sustainable water resources. Furthermore, GSCremains firmly committed to supporting developingcountries by providing tailored solutions for waterresource sustainability and enhancing capacity forwater management.[ 298 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHEcohydrology – transdisciplinary sustainabilityscience for multicultural cooperationProfessor Macej Zalewski, Katarzyna Izydorczyk, Iwona Wagner, Associate Professor Joanna Mankiewicz-Boczek,Magdalena Urbaniak, and Wojciech Frtczak, European Regional Centre for Ecohydrology, Polish Academy of SciencesGlobalization has accelerated development and, ingeneral, improved the quality of life of humanity.However, interconnected socioeconomic systems havealso accelerated and amplified the exploitation of naturalresources, which increases the risk of conflict.Harmonizing human needs with the potential of the biosphere isthe primary challenge in achieving a sustainable future. 1 In order toachieve global sustainability by reducing the overexploitation of naturalresources, there is an urgent need to replace competition for resourceuse with competition for resource use efficiency. This is especially relevantfor water and ecosystem resources, as water is a primary factor ofbiosphere dynamics. A sustainable approach must be based on integrativescience, with a focus on the integration of hydrology and ecology.Ecohydrology is an integrative, transdisciplinary, problemsolvingscience which focuses on the regulation of processes. It isbased on the general theories of physics, hydrology and ecology,whose implicit goal is to achieve sustainability. 2 It also considersgeophysics, geology, molecular biology, genetics, geo-informationtechniques, mathematical modelling with socioeconomic concepts(such as foresight) and aspects of law. 3 Ecohydrologyis based on two assumptions:• water is the major driver of biogeosphere evolution,since all ecological processes depend on water andtemperature 4• on the basin scale, the hydrological cycle is aframework for quantifying hydrological andbiological processes and identifying various formsof human impact.An understanding of those two factors, and of the functionalinterrelationships between hydrology and biotaat the catchment scale, should enable the regulation ofecological processes from the molecular to the landscapescale; the ultimate aim being to harmonize society’s needswith an enhanced carrying capacity for ecosystems. 5With this in mind, understanding the dependenceof ecosystem dynamics on soil water availability is afundamental step towards developing a methodologyand system approach at the river basin level. 6 EffectiveImage: ERCEImage: ERCEBrainstorming with decision makers involved in water resources, agriculture, urbanareas, forests, planning and NGOs in the Pilica catchmentPrimary school students measuring the concentration ofnutrients in groundwater[ 299 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHmanagement of water and nutrient dynamics from the landscapeto aquatic ecosystems, with the ecohydrological aim of enhancingcarrying capacity, must take place through harmonizing traditionalhydroengineering solutions with biotechnology. 7 Due to the complexityof synergetic and mutually interacting hydrological processes, theimplementation of biotechnological solutions to ensure the regulationof catchment-scale water must lead to enhancement of the self-organizationfunction of ecosystem/nutrient dynamics, 8 and must be carriedout using an adaptive assessment and management methodology. 9Recently applied scientific approaches and the methodologiesused in conservation, restoration, ecological engineering and ecohydrologyrepresent progress in understanding the ecological structureand dynamics of ecosystems and the impact of human activities.They embody a move from a species-structure-oriented perspectivetowards a more progressively process-oriented approach, exemplifiedby ecological engineering and ecohydrology. 10The goal of ecohydrology as a problem-solving science is to determinewhy the biosphere is drying and soil fertility is declining, andhow these trends can be reversed. The major challenges are:• slowing the transfer of water from the atmosphere to the sea(prioritizing flood and drought control)• reducing input and regulating the allocation of excess nutrientsand pollutants in aquatic ecosystems to improve water quality,biodiversity and human health• enhancing ecosystem carrying capacity (water resources,biodiversity, ecosystem services for society and resilience) bydual regulation towards harmonization with societal needs.The proposed highly-complex approach must be transferred to society,decision makers and politicians through transdisciplinary education.In the case of the highly-complex environmental problems that weexperience today there is an urgent need to move away from specializationin education and add a knowledge integrating element,enabling a broader understanding of the complexity of environmentalprocesses. Integration of the knowledge garnered across differentdisciplines should be facilitated on the basis of a common methodologicalbackground. Parallel educational efforts are needed to raisethe consciousness of society concerning possible realistic scenariosfor harmonizing societal needs with enhanced ecosystem potential:water, biodiversity, ecosystem services for society and resilience.Reducing cyanobacterial blooms: Sulejów ReservoirModification of the biogeochemical cycles on a catchment scale –resulting from degraded biocenosis structure and increased emissionsof nutrient and pollutants combined with climate change – seemsto be the main reason for acceleration of the eutrophication process,including the presence of cyanobacterial blooms in freshwater andcoastal ecosystems. An important indicator for assessing the threatof cyanobacteria to the environment and humans is the activity oftoxic genotypes, which are responsible for producing cyanotoxins thatcan cause skin irritation, impaired breathing (neurotoxin), diarrhoea,acute gastroenteritis, and kidney and liver damage (hepato- and cytotoxins).11 Thus, the molecular monitoring of toxigenic strains ofcyanobacteria acts as a precise indicator of the possible health threat.The Pilica River in Central Poland is a global reference site forecohydrology under the United Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization International Hydrological Programme. Theriver’s Sulejów Reservoir is a dam reservoir with progressive anthropogeniceutrophication, in which cyanobacterial blooms appearevery year. 12 During the bloom accumulation, the totalmicrocystin (cyanobacterial hepatotoxin) concentrationin the water could increase up to 30 μg L -1 . 13 Studiesusing sensitive molecular methods based on the detectionof genes involved in the synthesis of microcystinshowed that the genotypes of microcystin-producingcyanobacteria occurred throughout the period of monitoring,and their number increased with deterioratingenvironmental conditions for the development of cyanobacteria.14 This demonstrates that the availability ofphosphorus is a driving factor determining the intensityof cyanobacterial blooms in the reservoir. 15 Phosphorusconcentration (annual average: 0.078- 0.215 mg TP/l)strongly depends on the discharge pattern of the maintributaries and the chemical composition of the river’swater, which both determine the nutrient load enteringthe reservoir (average 87-693 t TP/year).The reduction of nutrient fluxes from the catchment isa fundamental measure for reducing toxic blooms. Due tovarious cumulative impacts from agriculture, urban zonesand recreation, actions aimed at reducing the developmentof cyanobacterial blooms must be based on cooperationbetween scientists, decision makers and stakeholders.In order to reverse eutrophication of a reservoir, itswater balance and nutrient flows should be considered inthe context of a whole catchment basin. The MONERISmodel for the Pilica River Basin showed that only around6.5 per cent of the phosphorus loads were from pointsources, with around 18.4 per cent from urban areas.Three quarters of the phosphorus load came from thelandscape, mainly associated with soil particles andorganic material eroded during flow events.Reducing the nutrient loads coming from the landscapedue to a high complexity of water-soil-plant-society interactionshas been much more complicated than controllingthe loads originating from the point sources. The preservationor construction of riparian land/water buffer zones(ecotones) is widely recommended to reduce the impactof nutrients present in the landscape on freshwater ecosystems.These linear belts of permanent vegetation adjacentto an aquatic ecosystem permit the improvement of waterquality by trapping and removing various non-pointsource pollutants from both overland and shallow subsurfaceflow pathways. Phosphorus retention in ecotones iscontrolled by a range of physical, geochemical and biologicalprocesses, including sediment deposition, adsorptionto iron and aluminium oxides or precipitation of calciumphosphates, and plant uptake.Highly effective buffer zones were designed and implementedin the direct catchment of the Sulejów Reservoir,an area characterized by heavy groundwater pollution,with phosphorus arising from non-point source pollutionfrom illegally leaking septic tanks. This demo site ofthe LIFE+EKOROB project 16 is located in a recreationalarea, where the shoreline is surrounded by cottages. Theseepage of groundwater heavily contaminated with phosphoruswas observed below the water level in the reservoirshoreline. Average phosphate concentration in groundwaterreached 3.1 mg PO 4/l, exceeding the threshold value[ 300 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHthat triggers the formation of cyanobacterial bloom. Due to the highconcentration of phosphate in the groundwater and seepage water,a limestone-based biogeochemical barrier was constructed to reducephosphorus levels through absorption and precipitation. Preliminaryresults indicate that phosphate concentration in the groundwater wasreduced by 58 per cent after it flowed through the barrier.The shoreline is intensively used for recreational purposes, andthe lack of tourist infrastructure in the sites contributes to devastationof the vegetation buffer zones. Following the ecohydrologicalaim of harmonizing society’s needs with the enhanced ecosystempotential, 17 restoration of the mosaic ecotone zones was combinedwith the construction of recreational infrastructures, such as jettiesfor fishing and boating.Individual ecohydrological methods can be synergistically linked intothe system solutions to complement existing hydrotechnical solutionsfor water resources management, contributing to enhancement of theoverall resilience of a catchment and its ability to provide ecosystemservices. The action plan to reduce diffuse pollution in the Pilica Riverbasin has been developed in cooperation with the Regional WaterManagement Authority in Warsaw, which is responsible for watermanagement of the Vistula River catchment and for the implementationof European Commission water directives.Stakeholders (regional authorities, local authorities, non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs), universities etc) were identified andintegrated through a multi-stakeholder platform which helps tocreate an independent space for discussion and exchange of experienceand knowledge. Additionally, measures have been organized toraise ecological awareness among the local communityand decision makers concerning the prevention of diffuseagricultural pollution. Public meetings for local people,educational activities for schoolchildren and training forspecialists, decision makers and teachers have been held.Blue-green city: urban ecohydrologyThe increasing global rate of urbanization and concurrentglobal climate changes create new challenges, but alsostimulate new approaches to the management of cities. 18Achieving sustainable development under increasingglobal pressures will depend to a great extent on howcities manage their natural and water resources. A keychallenge is insufficient space for water circulation in thecity landscape, due to uncontrolled or out-of-date urbandevelopment schemes. Rapid, damaging flash floodsfollowed by long-lasting dryness, the formation of urbanheat islands and the lowering of air humidity are some ofthe major consequences, contributing to higher incidenceof asthma and allergies in city dwellers. 19 This negativetendency can be reversed by changing the paradigm for themanagement of stormwater, which is the only renewablesource of water for cities. This valuable resource should beconsciously retained in city landscapes by rehabilitatingtheir blue and green infrastructure.A functional approach towards achieving this goal, byincluding urban ecosystems in holistic water manage-Reducing phosphorus pollution by enhancing plant buffer zones with biogeochemical barriers: LIFE+ EKOROB project Zarzcin demo siteSource: Izydorczyk K. 2013. ‘Chemical barrier for enhancement of buffer zone toward reduction of diffuse pollution by phosphorus - preliminary results’. Ecohydrol. &Hydrobiol. Article in press[ 301 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHTranslation of solutions for AfricaEthiopia is one of the biggest countries of the Africancontinent with an impressive history and high potenment,20 was tested in Łód, Poland. The Blue-Green Network concept 21applies an ecohydrology approach at the city scale, connecting rivervalleys and green spaces. Such an approach helps to reduce stormwaterrelatedrisks without investing in costly hard (grey) infrastructure. Itimproves the microclimate and encourages healthy lifestyles by providingspace for recreation. The city also becomes resilient to global climatechange while its improved image attracts business, contributing toeconomic development.The Blue-Green Network concept was tested at a demonstrationriver, the Sokołówka, which is supplied by stormwater outlets,almost lacking natural flow. The middle section has maintained asemi-natural character, holding value for city inhabitants as an areaof recreation. The measures attempted to harmonize the river’s existinghydrotechnical infrastructure with the potential of its ecosystem,to enhance its capacity for absorbing increased water and pollutantfluxes without compromising its quality and appearance. 22A Sequential Stormwater Biofiltration System (SSSB), containingsedimentation, biogeochemical and constructed wetland zones,was constructed in the upper section of the Sokołówka. In the firsttwo experimental years of its operation, the system has reducedsuspended matter by more than 90 per cent and concentrations oftotal nitrogen and phosphorus by up to 60 per cent. 23 A detentionpond recently constructed upstream of the SSSB stabilizes the riverflow and further increases the system’s efficiency.A cascade of retention reservoirs was constructed on the river tomitigate extreme flows and hydrological stress. Shaping the reservoir’shydrodynamics and phytoremediation gave it the capacity to absorb theincreased nutrient loads without the appearance of toxic algal blooms.Rehabilitation plans were elaborated for the riverand Sokołówka River Park, to improve the ecologicalstatus of the river. This increased the capacityfor water retention, groundwater amelioration andvegetation growth and improved social access anduse of the area.Space and expertise were created through higher,pre- and post-doctoral education, awareness raising andtraining, empowered decision-making, fostering interinstitutionalcooperation for better water management 24and triggering several bottom-up initiatives, includingthe implementation of basin management plans in newinvestments and the participation of NGOs.Through these activities, the city authorities movedtowards restoring the quality of the city through anintegrated approach in which environmental rehabilitationand spatial planning are as importantas economical and social issues. The Blue-GreenNetwork concept was included in the Strategy ofIntegrated Development of the City of Łód, 2020+.Systematic rehabilitation of green and blue areasenables recognition and a closer association of environmentalheritage with the revitalization of thecity’s historical industrial architecture.The first stage of the implementation of the Blue-Green Network concept: Sokołówka river in ŁódSource: Wagner and Zalewski, 2009; updated[ 302 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHtial for dynamic development. The fundamental opportunitiesare resources: fertile soils, a long growing season and humanpotential. However, major threats in many regions are created bythe limited and poor quality of water resources due to progressivedeforestation and urbanization. This process is causing seriousmodification of the hydrological and nutrient cycles, which inturn determine soil productivity. Therefore, the key challenge forthe sustainable future of Ethiopia and Africa is the restitution ofwater and soil resources.Pilot ecohydrological research at a demonstration area in theBiofarm Centre in Asella (CentralEthiopia), where the water from the reservoir was not used bylocal people due to negative impacts on human health, demonstratedthree major impacts on the functioning of this ecosystem:• a decrease in reservoir capacity due to erosion and siltation• toxic algal blooms in the reservoir, mostly due to nutrientoverload by livestock• elevated concentrations of dioxins in reservoir sediments.All these impacts have been reduced by the implementation ofecohydrological systemic solutions.The first element of the system is the use of biodegradablegeotextiles for land erosion control and the reduction of lakesiltation. Geotextiles enhance the early stages of the plants’growth by stabilizing the soil and it moisture. After the two-yeardevelopment of the root system the geotextiles decay, enhancingthe ecological functions of the catchments and ecosystemservices for society.The second element is an infiltration dam. Thisenforces sedimentation in the impoundment and transferof water through the gravel fundaments to the rootsystem of vetiver grass at the wetland, helping to reducenitrogen and phosphorus concentrations and preventingthe occurrence of toxic algal blooms in the reservoir.Sediments deposited in the sedimentation zone, whichare supposed to contain high levels of nutrients, arerecommended to be used as fertilizer for restoring erodedland and for food and bioenergy production.The high rate of insolation and the interactionbetween plants and soil microorganisms in the wetlandarea also allow a reduction in dioxin-induced toxicityby accelerating photo- and rhizodegradation processes.Another part of the system is the construction of acow-watering system some distance from the river,where the manure is collected and digested for furtheruse as fertilizer. This reduces the direct nitrogen inputof cows into the river and reservoir.The proposed ecohydrological holistic approach wasbased on earlier experiences in the Pilica and SokołówkaRiver catchment in Poland. 25 The above solutions arefocused on the sustainable use of environmental potentialand the enhancement of ecosystem services forsociety, including health aspects (reducing the dioxinconcentration in the environment and foodstuffs) andimproving opportunities for income generation fromthe production of food and bioenergy.Use of ecohydrology based systemic solutions for reduction of sedimentation, eutrophication and dixin-induced toxicitySource: ERCE[ 303 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHSharing water observations: turning localdata into global informationDr Harry Dixon, Professor John Rodda and Professor Alan Jenkins,Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, UK; Professor Siegfried Demuth, United Nations Educational Scientificand Cultural Organization; and Ulrich Looser, Federal Institute of Hydrology, GermanyMinimizing risks of losses or injury to individuals,businesses and communities is a shared goal of scientificinstitutions, public and private enterprises andgovernment. In terms of natural hazards, some of the mostserious sources of risk emanate from floods, droughts and tropicalstorms. To combat these and similar events it is vital tomeasure their severity, frequency and extent, to record thesedata, then to apply and disseminate them.Data describing the freshwater environment are employed for a greatvariety of practical purposes which have changed with time. Floodprevention was one of the earlier uses of rainfall and river flow datawhile the development of canals, hydropower and reservoirs followed.Control of water pollution required water chemistry measurements andthese are also needed with observations of rainfall, run-off and groundwaterlevels for water resources management. Evaporation and soilmoisture measurements are valuable for irrigation. Robust, lengthy andvaried hydrometeorological measurements are central to global changestudies. Employing reliable data to forecast, predict andunderstand hydrological processes reduces risk in each ofthese contexts: risk of failure through inadequate designand risk of financial loss.Collecting reliable and representative hydrometeorologicaldata, however, is difficult. The naturalenvironment is hostile to instruments; conditions arecontinually changing. Measurements of extremes, suchas heavy rainfalls and flood peaks, are particularly problematical.They are best made over long time periods andpoint measurements should be representative areally.With the advent of observations from satellites andweather radar the problem of spatial coverage has beeneased, but such technologies do not currently offer thelevels of accuracy required for many uses. As a result,ground-based measurements of the water cycle remainsome of the most essential environmental data collectedaround the world. At the core of such water data lieImage: Rivers Agency, Northern IrelandRiver flow gauging on the River Blackwater in Northern Ireland during a flood event in November 2009[ 304 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHobservations of river flow, the integrated output of all environmentalprocesses and human interactions occurring within a catchment.Observational information on river flows underpins informed decision-makingin areas such as flood risk estimation, water resourcesmanagement, hydro-ecological assessment and hydropower generation.Policy decisions across almost every sector of social, economicand environmental development are driven by the analysis of this freshwaterinformation. In light of this widespread importance, such data hasassumed a high political prominence in some areas of the world, withaccurate information on the state of water resources crucial to avoidingand resolving conflicts between individuals, organizations and evenstates. Its wide ranging utility, coupled with escalating analytical capabilitiesand information dissemination methods, has resulted in a rapidgrowth in demand for such data over the early years of the twenty-firstcentury and this trend looks set to continue in the near future.Recognition of the fundamental importance of observational freshwaterdata led to a growth in river monitoring networks in manyparts of the world in the second half of the twentieth century. Morerecently, developments in hydrometry (the science of water measurement)and the widespread adoption of digital recording coupled withthe growth of information technologies, in particular the developmentof the Internet, have provided the tools for more efficient data collectionand exchange. At the same time, escalating analytical capabilitiesand a heightened awareness of the changing environment have furtherincreased the demand for access to such information.In spite of recent developments, however, the availability ofhydrometric information continues to constrain both researchand operational hydrology across the globe. The third edition ofthe United Nations World Water Development Report (WWDR3)highlighted that “worldwide, water observation networks provideincomplete and incompatible data on water quantity and qualityfor managing water resources and predicting future needs.”Globally, funding constraints and changing governmental priori-A river monitoring station on the River Tywi in South Wales, UKImage: UK National River Flow Archiveties have resulted in a decline in some river gaugingstation networks, while concerns about misuse ofdata, commercial drivers, political sensitivities abouttransboundary resources and an overarching lack ofunderstanding about the value of river flow informationlimit the exchange of the hydrological data thatis collected. The 5th World Water Forum in 2009concluded that, as a result, many operational watermanagers lack adequate information to inform decision-making.Scientific researchers also lack sufficient observationalevidence, with a 2010 paper by Hannah andothers noting that large-scale international archives ofwater data are insufficiently populated in some areasof the world. 1 Freshwater environments, their drivers,controls and impacts are not constrained by nationalboundaries and hence international cooperation isvital to provide the information needed to further ourunderstanding of hydrological systems. Such problemsare ever more acute in the light of increasing globalconcerns surrounding hydrological variability.Case study: UK National River Flow ArchiveThe National River Flow Archive is a publically fundedfocal centre for hydrometric information storage,analysis and dissemination. 2 It provides access to riverflow data and associated information, and knowledge,advice and decision support on a range of hydrologicalissues. The archive serves a wide user communityincorporating water management professionals,scientific researchers, educational users, governmentbodies and international organizations.Under the UK’s distributed model for deliveringhydrological services, river flows are monitoredacross a dense network of gauging stations by fourseparate bodies with responsibilities to different areasof government. Their mandates include monitoringnetwork installation and upkeep, data collection, dataprocessing and initial data validation. Following this,data are provided at regular intervals to the NationalRiver Flow Archive, maintained by the Centre forEcology and Hydrology. Here, they undergo secondaryvalidation before being combined with auxiliaryinformation and added to the national archive for longtermstorage and dissemination.While the archive exists in a separate organizationalstructure to the major national and regional hydrometricmeasuring authorities, it is delivered through closecollaboration between stakeholders including thescientific research community, other data analysts,policymakers and national government. This cooperationis rooted in the long-standing need to assess waterresources across the United Kingdom as a whole andrecognition that river flow information collected in onearea of the country is valuable in managing freshwaterissues in other hydrologically similar catchmentswhich may be geographically and politically removed.Industry-standard regionalization methodologies havebeen developed to predict river flow characteristicsat locations where they are not monitored, throughextrapolation in space from locations where data isavailable. By pooling data across organizations, regionsand countries, the UK is able to better estimate riverflows at ungauged sites and manage the risks posed byhydrological extremes.[ 305 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHAn integrated system of hydrological data sensing, manipulationand use to transform locally collected monitoring data intocomprehensive information for managing freshwater systemsInformation usageand decision makingInformationdisseminationData synthesisand analysisSource: Dixon, Hannaford and Fry, 2013 2WaterinformationservicesMonitoring andnetwork designData validationand archivalData sensingand recordingIn light of this dearth of information there is a pressing requirementto address the inadequacies in river gauging networks andimprove hydrometric practices to ensure flows are accuratelyrecorded. Around the world, monitoring of rainfall, river flow,groundwater and other water stores remains lacking in many waterstressedcatchments. While targeted investment of international aidfinancing has helped to expand monitoring programmes in manyregions where they were previously deficient, there is a need tosupport the ongoing maintenance of networks and development oflocal expertise to ensure the longevity of such initiatives. Long-termpolitical, institutional and financial support for water monitoringmust be established and fostered around the world.Notwithstanding this need to improve the underlying monitoring,the opportunity currently exists to significantly advance globalwater science and management through improving cooperationon existing water data at all levels. At this time of both enhanceddemand for river flow data and increasing financial pressure on theorganizations tasked with maintaining networks, methods of cooperationwhich maximize the societal benefits of current hydrometricmonitoring are of crucial importance.The interconnected nature of freshwater systems, widespreadimplications of water management decisions and the often complexweb of stakeholders mean that river flow data can rarely be collected,analysed and utilized within one single organization in isolation.Information on river flows in one location may impact upon waterresource management decisions required under a separate jurisdictionat another, geographically remote location. Furthermore, datacan often be used to help understand and manage freshwater issuesbesides those for which they were originally collected. For example,river flow data collected by a local landowner to inform the design andoperation of a small-scale hydropower scheme may be of significantvalue to researchers investigating the implications of changing landmanagement practices on run-off generation in order to inform policydevelopment. Readily accessible, interchangeable hydrometric dataare therefore highly valuable not only to the initial monitoring body,but also to a wide community of users.Maximizing the value gleaned from data that is collected, and ensuringthat freshwater decisions are based on all available monitoring information,demands more open data policies, standardization ofmonitoring practices, efficient data management and effectivedata sharing. Cooperation at institutional, national andinternational scales is central to providing such access tocoherent, high-quality river flow information.Two examples of water data sharing which have deliveredsignificant advantages to water management areoutlined in the case studies on these pages. They are:• the United Kingdom’s experiences of cooperationbetween organizations operating with differingresponsibilities across geographical and politicaldivides to ensure coherent access to national-scalehydrometric information• the European Water Archive, which provideshydrological researchers working under the UnitedNations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO) umbrella with the accessto pan-European river flow information required toanswer continental-scale scientific questions.Both case studies highlight the benefits and opportunitiesin relation to cooperation between individualhydrologists, organizations and governments on theissue of water data. By bringing their monitoring dataand expertise together, the various stakeholders are ableto benefit from a richer shared information source andenhance the value of their individual operations.Nationally, there is an underlying need to supportimproved hydrometric data management and dissemination.These are crucial to the success of state-scale watermanagement and underpin international initiatives tocombat global water problems. Internationally, whileachievements to date should not be overlooked, furtherimprovements on hydrological data sharing are needed.Where data is collected, data policies, security concerns,commercial considerations and a lack of agreed protocolsfor sharing were all identified by WWDR3 as issues whichoften hamper the sharing of hydrological information.Intergovernmental support for data sharing is an importantfoundation for improving cooperation and to this end,in 1999, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)Congress adopted Resolution 25 (Cg-XIII) – Exchange ofHydrological Data and Products – establishing the policyand practice for international exchange of hydrological dataand products. Regionally too, in some of the over 260 transboundaryriver basins that exist worldwide, internationalagreements have been reached over the free exchange ofdata to aid navigation, flood protection, pollution preventionand power production. In doing so, the internationalcommunity recognized the potential benefits of enhancedexchange of hydrological data, and adopted a commitmentto broaden and enhance, whenever possible, the free andunrestricted exchange of such information. To realize thesebenefits, national and organizational data policies must alsobe reviewed to ensure that they recognize the high utility ofwater data beyond its initial intended use and the benefitsand efficiencies enabled by greater cooperation.Aside from government-funded freshwater monitoring,opportunities to improve cooperation on water[ 306 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHCase study: UNESCO FRIEND-Water European Water ArchiveImage: Global Runoff Data CentreRiver flow monitoring stations for which data are included in the UNESCO IHP FRIEND-Water European Water ArchiveThe UNESCO Flow Regimes from International Experimental and NetworkData (FRIEND-Water) programme 3 is a long-standing internationalcollaborative study in regional hydrology. One of the most successfulinitiatives developed by UNESCO’s International Hydrological Programme(IHP), FRIEND-Water has expanded from seven European countries in1985 to encompass 162 countries in 2010. It supports a diverse bodyof hydrological research around the globe, bringing up a new generationof scientists working together and sharing data, scientific knowledge andtechniques across political borders.A central feature of FRIEND-Water activities is scientific cooperationin relation to sharing hydrological data for research purposes.Through its eight regional groups, the programme has establishedregional databases which have grown over the years and are regularlyupdated in order to meet new research challenges. These hydrologicaldatabases are a cornerstone for FRIEND-Water research activities.The European Water Archive (EWA) represents the central database for theEURO-FRIEND-Water group and contains river flow records from over 4,000monitoring stations across 30 countries. It has grown to become one of themost comprehensive hydrological archives in Europe. Originally hosted by theCentre for Ecology and Hydrology in the UK, five regional data centres wereestablished across Europe to assist in the acquisition of data for the FRIEND-Water project. In 2004, maintenance of the EWA passed to the Global RunoffData Centre at the Federal Institute of Hydrology in Germany.Data archived in the EWA have been supplied on a voluntary basisand free of charge by hydrometric agencies across Europe. The EWA isfreely available for use by FRIEND-Water group members for researchpurposes and now supports international research in fields such as lowflow and drought, large-scale hydrological variations, techniques forextreme rainfall and flood run-off estimation, and catchment hydrologicaland biogeochemical processes.information also exist in the commercial sector. A recent report bythe World Business Council for Sustainable Development identifiedthe development and accessing of shared scientific data as key tothe implementation of catchment-scale water stewardship. Adoptingsuch an approach could provide significant commercial benefits tobusinesses, including mitigation of risks to long-term water securityand opportunities for cost savings and revenue growth.In tandem with policy development, another vital route towardsimproving international cooperation lies in the sharing of knowledgebetween hydrologists to build global monitoring capacity, developcommon understanding around data and provide mutual technicalsupport. A wide range of initiatives are currently underway toaddress the technical barriers to data exchange and harmonize datapractices and it is vital that these are supported both now and intothe future. For example, water data experts from around the world,working under the umbrella of WMO and the Open GeospatialConsortium, have come together to seek technical solutions to thechallenge of describing and exchanging surface and groundwaterdata. Similarly, the need for harmonization of global water measure-ment techniques resulted in the establishment, in 1964,of the International Organization for StandardizationTechnical Committee on Hydrometry – which hassince published over 70 international standards onwater measurement.Viewed together, these technical, organizationaland political opportunities to further increase internationalcooperation on water data represent thepossibility of a step-change in freshwater informationsharing around the globe. If coupled with initiativesto improve the underlying hydrological monitoring,the availability of quantitative observation data tosupport water science, management and policy developmentcan be greatly enhanced. The United NationsInternational Year of Water Cooperation provides abackdrop against which organizations, individualnations and the international community must renewand further support initiatives aimed at turning localwater data into global water information.[ 307 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHInternational cooperation onwater sciences and researchRaya Marina Stephan, Chair, Publications Committee and Tom Soo,Executive Director, International Water Resources AssociationGood knowledge of water resources represents animportant basis for planning their management anddevelopment. This knowledge is often related to thelevel of science and research in a country, the available capacitiesand various factors such as financial means, objectives ofnational strategies and others. International cooperation onwater sciences and research occurs very often and contributesto filling gaps and developing and sharing knowledge, or enrichingknowledge with specific approaches.Various frameworks allow such exchanges and cooperation. Theseframeworks are more or less formalized and are mainly constitutedby networks of experts organized either in international scientificassociations such as the International Water Resources Association(IWRA), or in regional and international expert groups such asthe working groups under the European Union Water FrameworkDirective or the Arab Integrated Water Resources Network. Otherpossibilities for international cooperation are offered by water eventswhich allow multiple exchanges and meetings among experts fromacross the world. International water projects also allow such cooperation,often facilitated by international organizations. Finally,publications and communications about water sciencesand research strengthen international cooperation andtransfer of knowledge.A network of experts: IWRAAs in other fields, water experts have created andestablished scientific associations, offering variousmeans for exchange among their members. IWRArepresents a recognized platform for exchange amongexperts and has become a major organization in thefield of water. Established in 1971, when the worldwas just beginning to mobilize around the need tomanage water resources on a global scale, IWRAwas one of the first international and multidisciplinaryorganizations of the water sector. Since itsearly years, the association has responded to a risingcall for water resources policy and management tobe addressed on a global and multidisciplinary level.IWRA thus became an international network andglobal knowledge-based forum of multidisciplinaryexperts on water resources.Image: IWRA/SooIWRA representatives discussing a science and technology centre with local authorities in Qingdao[ 308 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHThe principal objectives of IWRA, as defined by its constitutionand bylaws, are to:• lead and influence water policy and governance• develop and publicize methodological tools for assessment,improvement and conjunctive use of water• advance water resources planning, management, development,technology, research and education at international, regional andnational levels• provide a multidisciplinary forum to address and discuss water issues• generate, synthesize and disseminate knowledge and informationin the area of water and related resources and the environment• encourage, promote and participate in international, regional,national and local programmes and activities related to waterresources for the common benefit of humankind and the biosphere.As mentioned in its first objective, IWRA aims to act in the fieldof water policy, and it seeks to continually advance water resourcedecision-making by improving the collective understanding of thephysical, ecological, chemical, institutional, social and economicaspects of water. IWRA’s objective of playing a role in water policyis closely linked with the necessity to develop knowledge and understandingof water resources, which implies developing the scientificaspects of water resources including economics, sociology and law.To achieve its goals, the actions of IWRA are oriented towardsimproving exchanges of information and expertise among its ownmembers and the wider public, and networking with other organizationsto advance and develop common objectives. For instance,in preparation of its 14th World Water Congress (WWC), IWRAdeveloped a strong partnership with the International Associationfor Water Law, strengthening the themes and the sessions related tolegal and governance aspects.Furthermore, IWRA actively promotes the exchange of knowledgeand experiences across countries and regions. The critical importanceof locally-based knowledge and experience is strongly emphasizedin its information exchange activities. The belief that sustainabilityThe World Water Congress provides a forum for global knowledge-sharingImage: IWRA/Soorequires interdisciplinary action and international cooperationis a driving force behind the association.IWRA has developed geographical committees tofurther implement its mission and focus its activities.These committees allow for extensive regional networkingamong IWRA members.Exchange of knowledge through publicationsWhile promoting cooperation among its members andwith other organizations, IWRA seeks to facilitate knowledgegeneration and exchange among its members andthe wider public through several publishing activities.IWRA’s peer-reviewed journal, Water International(WI), places a specific emphasis on linking knowledgeto policy. Regular series of special issues are publishedin partnership with other major international organizations.For example, the March 2013 special issuefocused on the relevance of the 1997 United NationsWater Convention in the twenty-first century and waspublished in partnership with the World Wildlife Fundand the International Hydrological Programme (IHP)Hydrology for the Environment, Life and Policy Centrefor Water Law, Policy and Science, under the auspices ofthe United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO) at the University of Dundee. WIoffers an accessible platform for publication and disseminationto various organizations such IWMI. Furthermoreit represents a high-level publication, being published bya well-known editor and enjoying a wide readership. In2012 WI achieved the top position, in terms of impactfactor, for water journals related to water policy.The IWRA Update newsletters compile and shareinformation from all IWRA members. Along with toolssuch as the experts database offered for IWRA members,the newsletter ensures this exchange of information.In addition, books are often published in partnershipwith other international water organizations such as theInternational Water Management Institute (IWMI). Inthese various forms, IWRA is contributing to buildingcooperation on knowledge and research on a political,scientific and a wider public level.Cooperation by encouraging membershipIWRA manages the Toyoko and Hiroshi HoriEducation Fund which provides support for membershipof the association for promising scholars fromdeveloping economies, especially those designatedby the Organisation for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment (OECD) as least developed. Recipientsmust have a clear financial need, and come from countriesor regions that are OECD least developed areasas well as being areas significantly underrepresented inIWRA membership. The grants include full membershipof IWRA, which covers subscription to WI and accessto all the other advantages IWRA offers its members.The grants are a means at an individual scale to transferknowledge to experts who show potential to developactivities in their country and region, and to create anetwork of water experts.[ 309 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHIWRA projects include developing an international reference on water qualityguidelines for different water usesImage: StephanA platform for exchange: the World Water CongressImportant water events take place regularly at the global level, developinginternational exchanges and cooperation among water experts fromvarious regions. Major water events provide a forum and importantopportunity for water experts from around the world to meet, exchangeand establish links with each other. Such events play a role in developingcooperation on sciences and research. Usually these events areorganized around a specific theme related to water resources.Since 1973, long before the first World Water Forum (WWF), IWRAhas held a World Water Congress (WWC) every three years in variouslocations. The objective of the WWC is to provide a meeting place toshare experiences, promote discussion and present new knowledge,research results and developments in the field of water sciences aroundthe world. For over four decades, the WWC has been a major playerin the identification of global themes and emerging trends concerningthe water agenda. It does so by bringing together a large cross-sectionof stakeholders for the development and implementation of decisionsin the field of water.For instance the theme of the 14th WWC held at Porto de Galinhasin Brazil was ‘Adaptive water management, looking to the future’. Thenext WWC, which will be held in Edinburgh, Scotland in 2015, willfocus on ‘Global Water, a Resource for Development’, and will seek toexplore global water as a resource for economic, social and environmentaldevelopment. Water management has often been consideredas an end in itself, and not as a means to an end and an opportunityto achieve overall development, economic prosperity, improvement ofquality of life and environmental conservation. The idea is to effectivelybring attention to the importance of water as an essential ingredient fordevelopment. The scientific programme in such forums allows presentations,discussions and exchanges among water experts on specificissues. These events contribute to the identification of major globalthemes concerning the water agenda. They foster proactive partnershipsand alliances between individuals and organizationsfrom different fields of expertise and they are the placefor communicating the latest research, best practices andinnovative policy work by stakeholders and experts frommultiple water-related disciplines. The events contributetowards IWRA’s objective to lead and influence waterpolicy and governance.It is also important to mention the WWF which, since1997, has grown to become the largest internationalevent in the field of water with about 30,000 participantsfrom more than 190 countries. The resolutionto create the convener of the WWF, the World WaterCouncil, was itself taken during IWRA’s 8th WWCin Cairo, Egypt in 1994. This is another example ofIWRA’s potential influence at the policy level. IWRA iscurrently a member of the World Water Council’s Boardof Governors and contributes regularly to the WWF.Cooperation with international organizationsIWRA is a partner of UN Water, which is the UnitedNations mechanism for strengthening coordination andcoherence amongst UN entities regarding all freshwaterand sanitation related issues. IWRA is developingcooperation with such organizations and brings in itsexpertise and knowledge on water-related issues. In thisframe, IWRA is undertaking two projects in partnershipwith other major international water organizations.The first project seeks to strengthen the internationalinterface between science and policy in thefield of water, in partnership with UNESCO’s IHPand the French National Office for Water and AquaticEnvironments. The science-policy interface is alreadya priority of IWRA, and over the 2013-2015 period,IWRA will be making it a core strategic priority. Toachieve this, it will strengthen several key tools.IWRA will continue to maintain and strengthenWI and extend the impact of this publication.Multiple special editions of WI and books will alsobe published on various different policy-relatedthemes in partnership with major internationalorganizations. In addition, IWRA will increase itsengagement with different media (traditional, socialand professional) and through its newsletters. It willalso commence a project to create an academy forwater journalists in partnership with OOSKAnews,in order to increase scientific quality and to raise thequality and profile of water journalism.The second project is aimed at developing aninternational reference on water quality guidelinesfor different water uses within the framework of theUnited Nations Water Thematic Priority Areas. Forexample, within the framework of the priority area onwater quality and the WWF process, IWRA has madea commitment to establish a comprehensive globalcompendium on water quality, destined to become aworldwide reference.Since its establishment, IWRA has consistently used allthe avenues that are available to it to promote generation,synthesis, application and dissemination of knowledge.[ 310 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHThe Eco-Smart Waterworks SystemSoo Hong Noh, Centre for Eco-Smart Waterworks System, Yonsei UniversityThe global water shortage and uneven water supply anddemand problems are getting serious. According to aUN-Water analytical brief in 2013, one in six people worldwidedoes not have access to improved drinking water sources. 1Climate change dramatically affects water environments, causingincreases in frequent and heavy rainfall events, high turbidity inwater and algal blooms. In Korea, the concentrations of taste andodour-causing substances such as geosmin and 2-Methylisoborneol(2-MIB) in raw water have increased up to 1,000 nanograms perlitre (ng/L) during the summer season. Conventional drinkingwater treatment processes could not remove high turbidity or thetaste and odour-causing substances effectively. Climate change isan increasingly significant challenge in water supply.The Centre for Eco-Smart Waterworks System at YonseiUniversity was established in May 2011 and funded by theMinistry of Environment of Korea as a part of 10-year Global TopProject. 2 The centre has more than 50 academics and industrialpartners and an overall budget of US$72 million for five years.Its main goals are to:• develop advanced hybrid membrane water treatment systemsfor safe and sustainable water supply• develop total solution processes based on ET-IT-NT integratedtechnology covering the entire process from raw water intake towater treatment plant to the tap• promote the growth of global water companies.The global water market has rapidly expanded overrecent decades and is expected to grow even faster inthe coming years. The Korean Government has designatedwater business as a new growth engine and, likemany countries, has been building national strategiesfor promoting the water industry.The centre develops world-class membrane technology,a high-tech intelligent optimized water treatmentsystem, and a water treatment process optimized forexport markets. Its three main technologies for thedrinking water industry are:• fouling and chemical-resistant membrane moduleswith less energy consumption• hybrid membrane processes for the treatment ofdrinking water from various water sources• the Eco-Smart Waterworks System with a totalsolution based on ET-IT-NT technology.Korean engineering and construction companies haveextensive experience in the design and construction ofwaterworks systems in domestic and oversea markets.However, they have limited experience in the operationand maintenance of waterworks. The centre hassupported participating companies to obtain operationand maintenance experience with the cooperationof local governments such as Seoul and Daegu. ThisImages: Daewoo E&C (left); Hanwha E&C (right)Yeongdeungpo waterworks: the DIMS pressured membrane (left) and HTM submerged membrane (right)[ 311 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHEco-Smart Waterworks System projectsProjectProject #1Project #2Project #3Project #4Project #55-15-2Project #6Project #77-17-27-37-47-57-67-77-87-9Project #8Title of projectDevelopment of microfilter membrane module with energy saving and low foulingDevelopment of UF membrane and module with high permeability and high strengthDevelopment of membrane and module for treating highly concentrated backwash waterDevelopment of next-generation membrane and module for water purificationDevelopment of a novel water treatment technology to remove CECsDevelopment of analytical methods and a database for contaminants of emerging concerndrinking water systemsDevelopment of decision support system for optimization of advanced water treatment processDevelopment of water treatment process for tailored water qualityDesign, construction & operation of smart water system as a total solution (Newly construct andimprove big city’s water supply systemUpgrade of large scale waterworks systemDevelopment of eco-smart water supply system as a total solutionConstructing metropolitan waterworks systemSmall and medium city’s water supply system improvementDrinking water system construction for small and medium-sized citiesTechnical development of smart membrane drinking water treatment integration system formedium/small cityDevelopment of optimized operation for developing countries water treatment systemRetrofitting for an existing water supply system in big citiesOptimal intelligent advanced water treatment plant technology developmentsDevelopment of multi-purpose small-scale water treatment package systemOrganizationWoongjin ChemicalSamsung, Cheil IndustriesEconityKeimyung UniversityDaelim IndustrialWaterworks Research Institute,Seoul Metropolitan GovernmentKorea Institute ofConstruction TechnologyKorea Water ResourcesCorporationGS E&CDaewoo E&CHanwha E&CPOSCO E&CDaelim IndustrialCowayPOSCO ICTHyundai EngineeringSK E&CSTI C&DKorea Institute ofConstruction TechnologySource: Centre for Eco-smart Waterworks Systemcooperation is expected to lead Korean water companies to theglobal water market.Woongjin Chemical and Cheil Industries develop microfiltrationand ultrafiltration membranes and modules with high porosity, highstrength, low energy consumption and resistance to fouling. Econitydevelops membranes and modules optimized for highly concentratedbackwash water treatment. Keimyung University developsnext-generation membrane for water treatment using nanofibres andgraphemes. Daelim Industrial, the Waterworks Research Instituteof the Seoul Metropolitan Government and the Korea Institute ofConstruction Technology (KICT) develop highly efficient, lowenergymembrane-advanced oxidation process (AOP) hybrid waterpurification systems in response to the issue of constituents ofemerging concerns (CECs) in water. In particular, the WaterworksResearch Institute of the Seoul Metropolitan Government devel-ops analytical methods for CECs and has establisheda database for CEC concentration in raw water. TheKorea Water Resources Corporation has established adatabase of source water quality and develops tools forwater treatment processes optimized for source water.In addition, the company develops retrofitting technologyfor the conventional water treatment process.GS E&C and nine other companies develop technologyfor the design, construction and operation ofintelligent integrated waterworks systems using IT-ETintegrated processes from source water to the tap. Testbeds with a capacity of 1,000-5,000 m 3 per day havebeen constructed at eight waterworks in six of Korea’slocal governments to develop advanced water treatmentsystems based on the membrane-AOP hybrid processes.[ 312 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHImage: KICTThe packaged water treatment system in Ulaanbaatar, MongoliaHyundai Engineering develops a remote monitoring and decisionmakingsystem based on IT technology for the operation andmanagement of water treatment processes in Sri Lanka. KICT developssmall-scale, movable, decentralized water treatment packagesystems for developing countries and natural disaster preparation.The packaged water treatment system is being tested in Mongolia tooptimize its operation conditions.Through strategic projects, the centre expects to develop a functionaland intelligent integrated waterworks system and to increasethe applicability of environmentally-friendly technology based onIT-ET technologies. It is also expected that energy saving technologiesleading to low carbon economy will be developed.The Yeongdeungpo membrane system in Seoul, KoreaThe Yeongdeungpo membrane system is a water treatment systembased on membrane filtration processes replacing sand filtrationto produce good quality drinking water. It was completed in 2010through the joint efforts of the Ministry of Environment Korea,Seoul Metropolitan Government and private enterprises (DaewooE&C and Hanwha E&C).Daewoo Integrated Membrane System (DIMS) technologyproduces safe and reliable drinking water by removing pathogenicmicrobes and other hazardous matter from the raw water using apressurized membrane filtration system. This system is suitable forthe improvement of old plants to meet the reinforced drinking waterquality standard. The Yeongdeungpo membrane system has a capacityof 25,000 m 3 per day and has been producing quality drinkingwater for Seoul citizens since April 2011. It purifies raw water takenfrom the Han river by mixing, coagulation/flocculation, sedimentation,microfiltration, ozone oxidation, granular activated carbon(GAC) adsorption and disinfection processes.The Hanwha Technology Membrane (HTM) water system is anadvanced water treatment technology for drinking water productionbased on membrane filtration with a capacity of 25,000m 3 per day. It consists of an inline mixer, coagulationtank, submerged membrane tank, ozone tank and GACtank. The system is highly efficient, compact and haslow energy consumption compared to conventionalwater treatment systems.The system decreases turbidity up to 0.5Nephelometric Turbidity Units for treated water andcompletely removes pathogens such as Cryptosporidiumand Giadia from raw water. It also significantlydecreases the concentrations of taste and odour-causingsubstances such as 2-MIB and geosmin in drinkingwater to less than 10 ng/L, meeting the drinking waterquality standard of Korea.Hybrid membrane technologies such as DIMS andHTM can reduce not only the use of chemicals (such ascoagulants) by over 50 per cent compared with conventionalsand filtration; they can also reduce energy costsby up to 15 per cent by optimizing operating conditionsand management work.Since 2011, Daewoo E&C and Hanwha E&C havecontinued core research and development work on theEco-Smart Project, to optimize the technology of largescalewaterworks systems based on a total solution fordesign, construction and operation. Daewoo E&C andHanwha E&C worked with the Seoul MetropolitanGovernment to optimize operation technology at theYeongdeungpo drinking water treatment plant. An integratedwaterworks management system was established,networking the new membrane system and existingsand filter in order to improve unit operation functionand data management. In addition, the diagnosis functionof the membrane system, including membrane[ 313 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHPolonnaruwa drinking water treatment plant in Sri Lankaintegrity, was reinforced. An economical maintenance process wasachieved by optimization and modification in part of the pumpoperation, membrane cleaning procedures and membrane operationmodes. The total waterworks system including distribution lineswas also improved.The H-Eco water supply control system inPolonnaruwa, Sri LankaThe Polonnaruwa drinking water treatment plant was designedand constructed at Polonnaruwa, Sri Lanka in 2012 by HyundaiEngineering with support from the Asian Development Bank andthe Government of Sri Lanka. The plant purifies river water by aconventional process of intake, coagulation, sedimentation, sandfiltration and disinfection. Its capacity is 13,500 m 3 per day andit supplies safe drinking water to the people of Polonnaruwa city.In many cases, water treatment plants in developing countries arenot operated properly due to problems such as a lack of skilled operatorsand maintenance experience. In order to solve this problem,Hyundai Engineering has developed the H-Eco water supply controlsystem, which is a remote monitoring and operator support system.The system collects the water quality and flow rate data from sensorsinstalled in intake, water treatment plant, distribution pipelinesand taps. The collected data are analysed and assist the operator tomanage the water treatment system efficiently by providing onlineinformation about optimal operating conditions in the water treatmentplant. The H-Eco system networks several water treatmentplants scattered around the world with the main office of HyundaiEngineering in Seoul. It also provides solutions for operation andmaintenance to the operators in the plants.The H-Eco system consists of a water quality and water flow ratemonitoring system, a remote expert decision system and remotemonitoring and operator support system. In the water quality andflow rate monitoring system, water flow rate and water qualityImage: Hyundai Engineeringsuch as turbidity, dissolved organic carbon, residualchlorine, NH 4-N, NO 3-N, NO 2-N, oxidation reductionpotential and so on are automatically monitoredby sensors installed at intake, water treatment plant,distribution reservoirs, distribution pipelines andtaps. The expert decision system consists of automaticcontrol dosing systems for coagulant and chlorine, anda water supply pump schedule system. The systemassists the operator to make fast and accurate decisionsfor optimum operation.The H-Eco system is expected to reduce operationcosts (chemicals, electricity and so on) through aremote control system. It is also expected to providestable operation of the water treatment plant througha real-time monitoring and remote expert decisionmakingsystem.Packaged water treatment system inUlaanbaatar, MongoliaKICT has developed multi-purpose small-scale watertreatment package systems: a regionally customizedwater treatment system, a mobile emergency watertreatment package system, and an integrated managementsystem for distributed water treatment plants.This project has set targets such as selecting asuitable water quality guideline and drawing up keytechnology applicable to local areas. The system isnamed the ‘E 3 system’ because it achieves the threetargets of high efficiency, cost-effectiveness and lowenergy consumption.Mongolia was chosen as a target country in whichto test the operational safety of the system undervarious weather conditions, due to its intense coldin winter. An active on-site investigation was carriedout at Ulaanbaatar by building cooperation with theMongolian Government. As a result of the waterquality analysis, a skid-type pilot system was targetedto control manganese and bacteria. The systemwas installed in a 20-foot container compliant withInternational Organization for Standardization standards.A manganese-coated sand filter was chosen tocontrol manganese and particle contaminants in thewater. The ultraviolet disinfection system followedto remove pathogens. The water treatment packagesystem was designed with a capacity of 24 m 3 per day,supplying safe drinking water to between 3,000 and6,000 people in a day, assuming that one person typicallyconsume 4-8 litres of water daily.KICT has a plan to improve system performancethrough the long-term operation. This operationalknow-how is expected to provide Mongolia with safeand reliable water distribution by providing locallyavailableresources and an operating manual forsustainable operation and maintenance. In addition,technological support and business interchange withthe Mongolian Government will be carried forwardin a scheme established by mutual agreement. Thiscorporation is expected to be helpful to water industrydevelopment between Korea and Mongolia.[ 314 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHWater and Livelihoods Initiative:scientific cooperation and collaborationacross North Africa and the Middle EastC. King, Water and Livelihoods Initiative; S. Christiansen, Director, Office of Water Resources and Environment, United StatesAgency for International Development; T. Oweis, Director, Integrated Water and Land Management Program; and B. Dessalegn,Communication and Project Management specialist, International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry AreasAcross the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), waterscarcity presents societies and individuals with choicesto either compete or collaborate with one another.Cumulative water demands for domestic, industrial and agriculturalneeds have always exceeded the volume of resourceavailable in this region. Water has long been cycled and recycledalong the canals and drainage systems of the Nile and theEuphrates. An ever-increasing complexity of innovations forwater distribution and purification has evolved to make everydrop count time and again. Without technical knowledge ofthese water management solutions, collaboration and mutualtrust, individuals are vulnerable to persistent disturbancesaffecting their climate, hydrological, social, economic and agroecologicalsystems.Public scientific and technical cooperation has transformed lives andlandscapes across the MENA region, from the Maarib Dam in Yemento Lake Nasser in Egypt and the Man-Made River inLibya. More recently, a technological explosion of privatewells, plastic tunnels, social media and cellular phoneshas changed many of the rules of rural water managementin agricultural societies. New demands for exportproduction introduce new choices, benefits and risksto rural households. Pooling of intellectual resourcesand research funds across public and private sectors isurgently needed to address the deepening problems ofinsufficient food and water supplies and continue theregional tradition of scientific innovation. But despitethe ongoing technological and communications revolutions,scientific assessments tend to be short-lived,project-based and under-funded. Intellectual property isjealously guarded from critics and colleagues alike, andscaling the walls of institutional and disciplinary silos isnot for the faint-hearted. MENA’s young scientists needImage: T. OweisThe WLI collaborative model for research partnershipCBOs and individual farmersNational UniversitiesRegional UniversitiesUS UniversitiesandUSDA/ARSCGIARcentresA farmer in Lebanon: WLI research is often carried out with farmers on their own landSource: WLI 2013 MENA Platform document http://temp.icarda.org/wli/pdfs[ 315 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHand deserve all the support they can get, to collaborate as researchpartners and continue the tradition of innovation in this region.International partners seeking to build peace, prosperity andstrong economic ties across the region know that they need tomove beyond emergency assistance to restore and rejuvenate thelands once considered to be the breadbasket of Europe. In a worldfull of new uncertainties at home and abroad, many donors areunderstandably reluctant to jeopardize public funds and reputationsin pursuit of research that may not yield instant results.Some feel obliged to stick with instant ‘band-aid’ solutions, butothers might be willing to consider research and innovation.Experienced research partners with a long-term stake in successfulwater management research can use their accumulated knowledgeto capitalize on emerging discoveries and accelerate the effectivenessof assistance to research for development, reducing the risksfor donors. Pooling of resources among multilateral and bilateralpartners in support of promising research and extension successescould further encourage regional research institutions to incubateand explore new technological solutions and foster the enhancedlong-term thinking needed to address regional climate change,water scarcity and food security challenges.The Water and Livelihoods InitiativeThe United States Agency for International Development’s (USAID’s)best-bet solution for activating accumulated knowledge to addresswater scarcity and land degradation is its longstanding collaborationwith the International Center for Agricultural Research in the DryAreas (ICARDA) and its established cooperative ties to NationalAgricultural Research and Extension Systems (NARES) across theregion. Together, ICARDA, USAID and the NARES have establishedthe Water and Livelihoods Initiative (WLI), which offers donors theopportunity to contribute to a collaborative multi-partner undertakingwhere the anticipated impacts of improved scientific waterresources management are systematically verifiable, and underwrittenthrough participation by USAID and other cooperative partners.Through WLI, knowledge generated by NARES inEgypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Tunisia andYemen is harnessed with insights drawn from regional andinternational partners including:• three CGIAR centres (ICARDA, the InternationalWater Management Institute (IWMI) and theInternational Food Policy Research Institute)• a consortium of six United States universities(University of Florida, Utah State University,University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, TexasA&M University and University of California Davis)• regional and national universities• the United States Department of Agriculture,Agricultural Research Service• community-based organizations (CBOs) suchas private enterprises, cooperatives, producers’organizations, fishing associations, water users’associations, women’s groups, trade and businessassociations and others focused on naturalresource management.WLI has faced challenges to develop integrated scientificagendas for land and water management cooperation andcollaboration across MENA. Many of these are similarto the challenges encountered by previous single-donorinitiatives at the land-water interface, including themulti-donor Regional Initiative for Dryland Managementand the Flemish-funded United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization, United NationsUniversity and ICARDA international cooperativeresearch project on sustainable management of themarginal drylands. In each case, there is a need to setcommon agendas, identify objectives and ensure thatpartners’ progress towards them is recognized. Regionalplatforms and multi-donor undertakings addressingSustainable water and livelihoods framework for sharing success in scientific cooperation to enhancerural land and water managementAsset/capitalHumanPhysicalNaturalFinancialSocialVerifiable indicator in use or under considerationNumber of men and women benefiting from short-term training delivered through WLINumber of scientific publications resulting from long-term scientific research supported through WLIAgricultural land in the benchmark sites (ha, tons and value of dominant and target crops)Land under pilot testing of improved land and water management strategies and techniquesWater balance in the target watershed/irrigation district (available water resources compared to existing water use)Agricultural water use volumes (m 3 /ha) measured in the field under unimproved and improved management practicesOn-farm income (gross margin per hectare from selected crops with and without improved management)Total household income in relation to the rural poverty line with and without water management improvementsProducers’ organizations, water users’ associations, women’s groups, trade associations and CBOs receiving assistance(disaggregation of data on all above indicators by gender)Reporting2012-2012-2014-2012-2014-2014-2014-2014-2012-2012-Source: Water and Livelihoods Initiative 1st Quarterly Report. Available online at http://temp.icarda.org/wli/pdfs/WLIFirstQuarterProgressReport_2013.pdf[ 316 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHModelling the effects of improved on-farm water managementat the basin scaleWater harvesting involves the collection and conservation of scarce rainwaterresources to increase water availability for plant growth and combat desertificationLand and water management technologies, such as the microcatchmentwater harvesting technique practised in Jordan, use the landform to collectscarce water resources, conserving them in the soil and increasing wateravailability for natural plant growth or crop production. Collected water isused to supply barley fields and shrubs through a series of constructedbasins and outlets. Farmers have to be prepared to invest labour inconstruction and maintenance of the systems, and require skills to evaluateand maximize their effectiveness. The Jordanian National Center forAgricultural Research and Extension (NCARE) works in collaboration withfarmers and farmers’ associations to demonstrate and transfer these skillsthrough practical experimentation on farmers’ own land, and organizes fielddays for farmers and decision-makers to view the results. Methodologicalsupport for the use of focus groups and other rapid appraisal techniques isprovided through collaboration with the University of Florida and ICARDA’sSocioeconomic, Gender and Policy Research Program.Collaborative studies undertaken with the Jordanian University of Scienceand Technology and Texas A&M have introduced a soil water assessmenttool to model the effects of the water harvesting on hydrology, erosion andvegetation. Scientific exchanges involving WLI research teams from othercountries, ICARDA and IWMI have introduced the research team to waterevaluation and planning tools for assessment of the water balance at basinscale. Researchers from the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign haveintroduced consideration of downscaled global climate models and climatechange scenarios. From 2014 collaborative research and cooperation willenable the WLI teams to project future basin-level water balance scenarioswith and without water harvesting and other integrated land and otherwater management practices.land degradation an water scarcity in drylands also face these challenges,and have sometimes had to admit collective failure. Followingthese experiences, considerable comparative achievements have beenmade through WLI so far, and the lessons learned may be useful inenabling the transition from a single-donor initiative to a successfulmulti-donor scientific cooperation and collaboration across MENA.The available literature on communities of practice and collectiveaction highlights the need for groups to identify common objectivesand establish trust through standard procedures for evidencebaseddecision-making and an agreed plan of action. Three years ofconsultation enabled WLI to develop a set of common objectives todemonstrate that integrated land and water management can improvethe livelihoods of rural households. Another three years of seedfundedcollaborative field testing work by ICARDA, NARES and USand MENA universities has nurtured a budding research for developmentinitiative, which could bear fruit. There is now a need forthis to be collectively recognized and projected across an appropriateImage: T. Oweistimeframe for sustainable land and water managementimpact – i.e. at least 10 years.Innovative approaches for research anddevelopmentWLI is a grounded, site-based initiative that brings internationalpartners to the field, not just the debating table.It follows the proven ‘Water Benchmarks’ approach establishedby ICARDA for various agro-ecologies, wherebyscientific cooperation concentrates donor support forpilot testing of integrated water, land use and livelihoodstrategies developed at selected sites across the region. Thecritical mass and layering of successive investigations atthese sites ensures that a strong body of data and analysisfrom different disciplines is available to track and verifythe effects of land and water management strategies andtechnologies, and evaluate their suitability for scaling up/out to other areas of rain-fed, irrigated and rangeland agroecosystems.Much of the research is participatory, and isoften carried out with farmers on their own land.WLI donors and partners are committed to workingtogether in the drylands and enjoy spending time in thefield with collaborators and beneficiaries. However, someWLI sites are in areas difficult to access. To keep track ofthe WLI research teams’ progress and share informationamong research partners, beneficiaries, donors and thepublic, WLI has established a monitoring and evaluationsystem using USAID’s Feed the Future indicators.Moving beyond the tracking of progress, USAID haschampioned the projection and measurement of livelihoodimpacts from improved land and water managementthrough WLI in the belief that these are at the heart of everyone’sdevelopment agendas. The WLI teams have adoptedonly a small number of indicators that are already operationalor can be operationalized during the coming year,without resorting to using an over-burdensome system.Although no indicator alone captures impact, togetherthey provide the best available means to do so. Otherinternational scientific initiatives, including several fundedthrough the European Union and the Global EnvironmentFacility, have previously designed and operationalized sucha system, but were not able to design a system that wouldbe acceptable to all concerned national governments anddonors. Through WLI, instead of endlessly searching for aperfect blueprint, the system can be declared operationalwhen it is already in place across the region. This is thanksto scientific support from ICARDA and participatinguniversities, which has given the NARES the confidence toadopt workable methodologies and benefit from a networkof peer-reviewers to improve them.Cooperation to measure impactsCreating an operational system for monitoring progressin integrated land and water management to improverural livelihoods was a daunting task that none of thepartners could have achieved alone. Although researchersand resource managers intuitively knew that theywere improving rural livelihoods by enhancing landand water management, most were not well-equipped[ 317 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHto measure these impacts. In the eyes of potential donors, this wasa problem that prevented investment in scientific cooperation andcollaboration – a problem that is now solved within WLI.To share the WLI solution with other donors and benefit othercollaborative scientific initiatives across MENA, a series of challengesstill remain, and cooperative work among a widening rangeof partners and parallel initiatives will be needed. National expertsin land and water management are not familiar with the tools andconcepts of livelihood assessment, and often feel unqualified orreluctant to use them. On the other hand, development partners arewell-versed in analyzing the determinants of poverty and economicdevelopment, but often do not have a practical understanding ofthe complex pathways through which these may be affected by aparticular plant variety or cultivation practice. They also struggleto comprehend the possible effects of confounding factors, andmay be uncertain about whether their support would ever be ableto demonstrate that it has achieved any solidly attributable benefit.Land and water managers need to be able to reassure them of this.Collaborative work through WLI has focused on the shared challengeof identifying the best available scientific methods for capturing andmeasuring livelihood impacts from innovative land and water management.With technical guidance and support from USAID and ICARDAthrough WLI, reporting of the first five indicators in the sustainablewater and livelihoods framework by collaborating research teams beganduring 2012. This included target-setting for the coming three years interms of technological development, capacity building and implementationof improved management strategies in the field. For the remainingfive indicators, scientific cooperation is enabling WLI to develop necessarymethodological guidance. This will equip the research teams touse, critique and improve available scientific methods for the estimationand tracking of agricultural water management and productivity, basinscalewater management and effects on the income of rural households.Rewarding international cooperationFrom 2014 it is anticipated that baselines and targets for quantifiable,verifiable and collectively recognizable success in improving land, waterand livelihoods will be in place for all 10 indicators in the framework.Where impacts are systematically recognizable, shared, quantifiable andunderwritten through USAID participation, it is hoped that more partnerswill decide to invest their support, and share the common success.Ongoing collaborative work among WLI partners demonstratesthe progress made towards the operational use of the remainingfive indicators needed to connect water management innovationsto measurable impacts on livelihoods. Work remains to be doneon the framework and indicators, but the collaborative approachamong scientific and development partners is the surest way toachieve it. Scientific exchange and collaborative work is also thebest way to ensure that measurement methods meet universallyapplicable standards of scientific rigour and reliability. Collectivemethodological and measurement challenges will no doubtremain, in order to refine the indicators and enhance the qualityand specificity of results to meet all stakeholders’ expectations.Appropriate methods for assessment of rural livelihoods, povertyand income generation are sensitive topics for public debate andnational policy attention, as well as priority concerns for the internationaldonor communities.Partners collaborating in WLI so far have a lot to be proud of and,finally, a great system for sharing their achievements with others.Over the coming years, thanks to the sustainable water and liveli-Field monitoring of agricultural landand water productivityWLI researchers in Egypt are working to raise the waterproductivity of citrus fruit treesNARES are well-experienced in recording hectares of landunder agricultural uses, and assessing the volumes andvalues of crop production. But they do not systematicallycombine these statistics with water use and waterproductivity assessments to calculate the full potential watersavings that could be achieved through innovative watermanagement practices.Fruit trees offer a less water-intensive alternative tocereals, and can be cultivated at the water-scarce tailendsof irrigation canals or under drip irrigation. The WLIresearch team in Lebanon is working to raise the value ofthe more drought-tolerant indigenous soft fruit varieties byclassifying and certifying them, promoting their tastes andqualities for export, and mentoring farmers in integrated pestmanagement techniques, among other things.Researchers are interested to learn how controlled waterstress introduced to fruit crops through deficit irrigation canenhance their productivity and flavour. The WLI researchteams are uniquely placed to observe these stresses, andensure that producers in their countries can benefit fromresearch findings. Knowledge exchanges with ICARDAscientists and US university partners focused on modellingcrop-water requirements and productivity. WLI researchersin Tunisia are seeking knowledge from university partnersin Florida and Spain to help them to model the effects ofclimate change on citrus production.Collaborative work among the Egyptian Water ManagementResearch Institute, Agricultural Research Institute, AmericanUniversity in Cairo and citrus producers’ agriculturalassociations is already enabling WLI researchers in Egypt toconnect their collective research capacities, and record effectson water productivity in US dollars per hectare and per cubicmetre of water. WLI is now preparing to report these impactsfrom integrated land and water management research toUSAID and any other interested donors on an annual basis.hoods framework, they should look forward to engagingfurther additional support through a multi-donorinitiative. This is needed to scale out the innovationsachieved in MENA so far. The key to successful cooperationin the water sector is ensuring that everybodywins, especially the most vulnerable rural householdsin water-scarce areas, whose livelihoods mainly dependon agricultural water management. To succeed in this,a wider collaboration involving more scientific partnersdonors, and rural communities will be needed.Image: Caroline King[ 318 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHWater for sustainable developmentand adaptation to climate changeMilan Dimkic, Miodrag Milovanovic and Radisav Pavlovic,Jaroslav Cerni Institute for the Development of Water Resources, SerbiaThe establishment of a United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) CategoryII Centre for Water for Sustainable Development andAdaptation to Climate Change was approved in 2012. The centreis expected to enhance scientific cooperation at the regional leveland to contribute to international sciences on water research,management and knowledge transfer, with a valuable contributionto the current seventh phase of the International HydrologicalProgramme (IHP) and to the upcoming eighth phase. It has beenoperational since 2013, and is hosted by the Jaroslav CerniInstitute (JCI) for the Development of Water Resources.JCI’s origins date back more than 60 years. It was initially an experimentalhydraulics laboratory which provided scientific support forthe development of the country’s first hydroelectric power plants.Over the years, JCI grew and expanded its research, investigation,planning, design and engineering activities to encompass all watermanagement segments in the former Yugoslavia. In addition to itsdomestic activities, JCI successfully undertook diverse projects inmore than 20 countries across the world.Today, JCI is the focal institution in Serbia’s water sector, in termsof professional capacity and scope. It is also Serbia’s leading researchorganization. In addition to high-level research, JCI performs a widevariety of other activities which constitute its core functions. Theseinclude the planning and engineering of water and hydropowerinfrastructures; engineer oversight of hydraulic projects;consulting services associated with the management ofwater resources, facilities, and systems; development ofstrategic planning documents; expert evaluations; andassistance in the drafting of national legislation, standards,methodologies and guidelines.JCI currently employs some 250 individuals, mostof whom are university graduates with PhD and MScdegrees in various disciplines (civil/hydraulic and structural,hydrogeological, chemical, environmental, forest,mechanical, electrical, mathematical and biological engineers;architects, economists, lawyers and so on). JCIalso maintains close ties with domestic and internationaluniversities, organizations and experts. The extraordinaryhuman resources of the institute ensure a very highlevel of studies and projects in different fields of waterand energy sectors and environmental protection.JCI has a number of laboratories for hydraulic, waterquality, biochemical, soil and sediment research, andcutting-edge instrumentation for field measurementsand analyses in areas such as geophysics, hydrogeologyand hydrochemistry. It also operates a state-of-the-artinformation system and possesses a large library ofadvanced software used in water research and management.JCI has itself developed sophisticated software toaddress specific problems.The Jaroslav Cerni Institute is the focal institution in Serbia’s water sectorImage: JCINeeds of Serbia’s water sectorSerbia is currently faced with extremely important andextensive tasks in its water sector. Dramatically reducedspending over the past 25 years has led to a significantfalling behind in the construction of necessary waterinfrastructures and, to some extent, in the very organizationand structuring of Serbia’s water sector. Watersector investment needs are currently estimated at aminimum of €6-8 billion.Investments and efficient water sector managementarrangements are indispensable for appropriate actionand the achievement of targeted status in the areas ofwater protection, water use, and protection againstthe adverse effects of water. Serbia has enacted a newWater Law and is currently drafting a series of relatedby-laws. In parallel, it needs to upgrade government andeconomic capacities and undertake extremely importantreforms in its economic and finance sectors. In[ 319 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHImage: JCIImage: JCIThe Krupac Water Spring in Eastern SerbiaA spillway on the Prvonek Dam in Southern Serbiasummary, major efforts need to be made during the next 15-20 yearsto harmonize Serbia’s water sector arrangements with EuropeanUnion requirements, and at the same time achieve a water statuswhich reflects legitimate societal needs.JCI actively monitors developments in the international arena andhas established close ties with a number of international institutions.International cooperationSpecial emphasis is placed on the following activities:• collaboration with international associations such as theInternational Water Association (IWA) and the InternationalAssociation of Water Supply Companies in the Danube RiverCatchment Area (IAWD)• cooperation with international commissions including theInternational Commission for the Protection of the DanubeRiver (ICPDR) and the International Sava River BasinCommission (Sava Commission)• participation in international projects (FP, SEE etc)• organization and hosting of international conferences:• Groundwater Management in Large River Basins (2007)• Planning and Management of Water Resources Systems (2008)• Balkans Regional Young Water Professionals Conference (2010)• IWA Specialist Groundwater Conference (2011).JCI has made and continues to make significant scientific contributions.For example, it is actively involved in long-term research onthe ageing of wells and other groundwater abstraction facilities, inrelation to the aerobic state of the aquifer.UNESCO Category II CentreIn order to satisfy Serbia’s water sector need, and to facilitatenetworking and capacity building at the regional and internationallevels, in 2012 UNESCO approved the opening of its new CategoryII Centre for Water for Sustainable Development and Adaptation toClimate Change at JCI. The centre has been operational since 2013.The main activities of the centre include networkingin water management knowledge dissemination, witha focus on capacity building and problem solving ineconomic transition countries and taking into accountclimate change and socioeconomic transformation. Thecentre provides highly-specialized human resources andmanagement capacity building, and assists in the developmentof baseline studies and water management plans.Expected benefitsSeveral benefits are expected from the outcomes of thecentre’s activities. At the country level, these includemanagement capacity building at centralized andmunicipal institutions in charge of water managementand the establishment of closer ties with scientific andprofessional organizations, both from countries withinthe region and beyond. The integration and enhancementof water management capacities and knowledge,and assistance in the development of studies and masterplans, are also key benefits expected at this level.At the regional level, the centre will enable the networkingof institutions and all resources involved in water managementdevelopment and climate change programmes. Theseactivities include study and awareness raising about theimpact of economic transition and climate change on watermanagement, and capacity building.Under UNESCO-IHP, the centre will enable advancesin capacity building and networking. Activities will beaimed at identifying the impact of climate change onwater resources, and raising awareness of the issuesof transition countries and the impact of such issueson water management. The centre will also focus onimproving north-south water management cooperationin circumstances involving socioeconomic andclimate changes.[ 320 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHThe IWA Specialist Groundwater Conference in Belgrade, 2011Ongoing north-south cooperationJCI has taken part in a number of UNESCO’s ongoing activities.These include the Training and planning workshop to develop aroadmap for integrated disaster management in Namibia, in May2012 - an activity that will continue in late 2013. In May 2012 JCItook part in the international workshop on implementing modularcurricula for tertiary technical and vocational education in IWRM,in Kaduna, Nigeria. In March 2013 the institute participated at thenational capacity building workshop on hydro-disaster risk managementand preparation of a national action plan, in Cotonou, Benin;and in May 2013 at the training and planning workshop to developa roadmap for IWRM and flood risk control in South Sudan.Memoranda of Understanding have been signed with the RegionalCentre on Integrated River Basin Management in Kaduna, Nigeria;the UNESCO Chair in Hydroinformatics at Capital NormalUniversity in Beijing, China; and the International EngineeringInstitute of Water and Environment in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.2013 conferencesThe ‘UNESCO Symposium-cum-Experts Meeting’ was held inBelgrade on 9-11 July 2013, covering the following four topics:• analytical methods for the detection of emerging pollutants andtheir transformation products• toxicity of emerging pollutants and their water-related properties(degradability, solubility, sorption)• emissions and treatment of emerging pollutants• occurrence and fate of emerging pollutants in surface water andgroundwater, and mathematical modelling.The contributions by leading experts in the matter, includingkey recommendations and conclusions, will be soon publishedby UNESCO.From 17-18 October 2013, the centre is organizing the InternationalConference on Climate Change Impacts on Water Resources whichwill cover the following topics:Image: JCINetworkingOne of JCI and the UNESCO centre’s development goals isenhanced networking with international and national institutions.JCI maintains close ties with many organizations which alsostrongly supported the establishment of the UNESCO centre.At the international level, JCI has close ties with the following:• World Water Assessment Programme• Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford• UNESCO IHE• International Sediment Initiative• International Flood Initiative• World Meteorological Organization (WMO)• United Nations University• International Association of Hydrological Sciences• International Strategy for Disaster Reduction• International Groundwater Assessment Centre• European Regional Centre for Ecohydrology• IHP-HELP Centre• International Centre for Water Hazardand Risk Management• WMO World Climate Program - Water• Water Technology Center, Karlsruhe• International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River• International Association of the Waterworks in the DanubeCatchment Area• Sava Commission• Slovak National Committee for the UNESCO-IHP• Bulgarian National Committee for the UNESCO-IHP• Water Institute of the Republic of Slovenia• University of Banja Luka, Faculty of Architecture and CivilEngineering, Bosnia and Herzegovina• Hydrometeorological Institute of Montenegro• University of Skopje, Macedonia, Institute of Biology andFaculties of Civil Engineering, Forestry, Natural Sciencesand Mathematics, and Agricultural Sciences and Food.At the national level, ties include the:• University of Belgrade Faculties of Mining and Geologyand Civil Engineering• Sinisa Stankovic Institute of Biological Research• University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences• University of Nis, Faculty of Civil Engineeringand Architecture.• climate change and global changes: factors thatcause them, observed changes and predictions• the impact of global changes on water resources– observed changes and different predictionmethodologies (the importance of data quality,cooperation and monitoring; the impact of differentfactors on river discharges and trends suchas climate change in meteorological data, varioushuman activities and influences on water resources,land use changes, and so on)• water scarcity (water use and agriculture underglobal changes; adaptation measures for watermanagement; frameworks and policies)• water resources management under global changeconditions (regional and transboundary riverbasin management; floods; the role of ecosystemservices and so on).JCI and its UNESCO Category II Centre will continuealong the path of ongoing capacity development andenhancement, and regional collaboration.[ 321 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHCooperation on water sciences and researchChristophe Cudennec, Gordon Young, Hubert Savenije, International Association of Hydrological SciencesWater is the basis of life. It is fundamental to maintaininghuman health and for sustaining all animal andplant life on Earth. Water underpins food production,is vital for health, is used by many industries, is needed forthe production of energy and is essential for the sustenance ofthe natural ecosystems on which we all depend. Paradoxically,water is also a threat to life and livelihoods – too much watercan produce disastrous floods, too little can produce droughtconditions, depriving natural and human systems of vital nourishment.In addition, pollution spills can cause degradation oflife support systems.As human populations grow and as large segments of the populationacquire more wealth, the use of water increases. And as moredemands are put on the resource, competition between uses andusers also increases, requiring decisions to be made on equitableand fair allocation procedures. At the same time, more peoplefind themselves living in flood-prone locations – on flood plainsand in low lying coastal regions – putting themselves at growinglevels of risk. Conversely, in many arid regions, the prevalenceof drought is increasing, rendering large numbers ofpeople at risk of water scarcity. Efficient and effectivewater management is of greater importance in decidinghow to best allocate scarce resources and how tomitigate and adapt to floods and droughts.Accurately predicting and forecasting water availabilityand the likelihood of too much or too little water isdependent on understanding how hydrological systemsfunction. And, as better understanding of hydrologicalsystems leads to more informed management decisions,this understanding is of fundamental importance to efficientand effective management of the resource.In 2012, the International Association of HydrologicalSciences (IAHS) celebrated 90 years of catalysing andstructuring the development and flow of hydrologicalsciences based on a worldwide scope and community,and leading to the consolidation of knowledge throughtime. Through the work of its ten Commissions andthree Working Groups, IAHS covers research into allaspects of hydrological systems and water manage-Image: G. YoungSection of Iguassu Falls, Brazil[ 322 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHPanta Rhei: three clear objectivesUnderstanding. This has always been the essence ofhydrology as a science. Improving our knowledge ofhydrological systems and their responses to changingenvironmental (including anthropomorphic) conditions,and in particular variability and indeterminacy,is a key step in deciphering change and the interactionwith society. Special attention is to be devotedto complex systems like mountain areas, urban areas,alluvial fans, deltas, intensive agricultural areas, and tothe specification of new measurement and data analysistechniques, which will allow the development of newunderstanding of coevolution processes.Estimation and prediction. This is closely related tounderstanding, and it is the essence of hydrologic engineeringand hydrological applications, embracing floodrisk mitigation and water resources management. Thisobjective includes estimation of design variables underchange and uncertainty assessment that is a crucial stepto support risk evaluation.Science in practice. This signifies that Panta Rhei aimsto include humans in the study of hydrological systemsand therefore aims to achieve an iterative exchangebetween science, technology and society. Science inpractice is science for people. It is, therefore, relevant toscience (both fundamental and applied) and relevant towater technology. It includes policymaking and implementpractices. In the past decade (2003-2012), IAHS has focusedits research on Prediction in Ungauged Basins (PUB), developingmodels to better predict availability of water in diverse climatic andeconomic circumstances and water-use settings, and to better forecastand predict floods and droughts in basins and regions in whichthere has been little or inadequate data on which to base models.The PUB decade has resulted in three major publications: RunoffPrediction in Ungauged Basins – Synthesis across Processes, Placesand Scales, published by Cambridge University Press; a summaryarticle in the Hydrological Sciences Journal ‘A decade of Predictionsin Ungauged Basins (PUB) – a review’; and Putting PUB into Practice(in press as of April 2013). These publications combine advancingthe predictive capability and fundamental understanding of hydrologicalprocesses with making the findings relevant to the needsof societies in basins of all scales. The PUB initiative has broughttogether scientists, practitioners and policy makers from aroundthe world and from many organizations, including UNESCO, in acooperative effort.Currently, IAHS is developing a new scientific decade for 2013-2022,entitled ‘Panta Rhei – Everything Flows’. The initiative is dedicated toresearch activities on change in hydrology and society. The purposeof Panta Rhei is to reach an improved interpretation of the processesgoverning the water cycle by focusing on their shifting dynamics inconnection with rapidly changing human systems. The practical aimis to improve our capability to make predictions of water resourcesdynamics to support sustainable societal development in a changingenvironment. The concept implies a focus on hydrological systems as achanging interface between environment and society, whose dynamicsare essential for determining water security, human safety and development,and for setting priorities for environmental management. Thescientific decade 2013-2022 will devise innovative theoretical blue-Image: G. Youngprints for the representation of processes including changeand will focus on advanced monitoring and data analysistechniques. An interdisciplinary path will be sought bybridging with socio-economic sciences and geosciencesin general.Panta Rhei fits well within the much broader ‘FutureEarth’ initiative. This major ten-year programme startedin 2013 and brings together natural and social sciencesthrough cooperation between the International Councilfor Science (ICSU), the International Social SciencesCouncil (ISSC) and the Belmont Forum, along withseveral other major international organizations includingUNESCO. As water is a key element underpinning sustainabilityfor society, seeking the connection and synthesizingthe research findings from the two initiatives will provide aunique opportunity to promote interdisciplinarity.Hydrology and water securityDrinking water supply in Kibera, Nairobi, KenyaAs defined by UNESCO (1964), hydrology is the sciencethat deals with the waters of the Earth; their occurrence,circulation and distribution on the planet; their physicaland chemical properties; and their interactions withthe physical and biological environment, including theirresponses to human activity.Water security is defined as the capacity of apopulation to safeguard sustainable access to adequatequantities of acceptable quality water for sustaininglivelihoods, human well-being, and socio-economicdevelopment; for ensuring protection against water-bornepollution and water-related disasters; and for preservingecosystems in a climate of peace and political stability.[ 323 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHImage: IAHSThe IAHS VIIth Scientific Assembly participants, Foz de Iguassu, Brazil, 2005mentation. The fact that hydrology is relevant to society implies theidentification of societal needs for water – for the various water uses– as well as the threats that water poses in terms of flooding, landdegradation and droughts. Here, we need a shift in paradigms ofmodern water management based on equities between demand andsupply driven activities.Panta Rhei recognizes the feedback between each of the threetargets: improved understanding may potentially lead to more accuratepredictions, which helps sustainable management. However,management itself can contribute to the cycle of understanding.The study of change in hydrological systems and society impliesfundamental science questions that in Panta Rhei have been deliberatelykept few and concise. They have been formulated after anextensive consultation with members of the hydrological and waterresources community. The major science questions are:• What are the key gaps in our understanding of change?• How do changes in hydrological systems interact with and affectnatural and social systems driven by hydrological processes?• How to identify and represent the occurrence and drivers ofchange in hydrological systems?• How to improve knowledge of hydrological systems includingindeterminacy assessment for improving modelling, predictionand uncertainty estimation?• How can we advance our monitoring and data analysiscapabilities of hydrological processes?• How can we support societies to adapt to changing conditionsby considering the uncertainties and feedback mechanismsbetween natural and human-induced changes?The science questions of Panta Rhei are rooted in the fundamentalconcepts of hydrology and are focused on society and environmentalmanagement. They propose a compelling synthesis between basic andapplied research.While IAHS is developing its science plan for the nextdecade, UNESCO is developing the 8th Phase of theInternational Hydrological Programme (IHP) coveringthe period 2014-2021. The emphasis here is on watersecurity, recognized as a key challenge for the 21stcentury. The plan envisages actions to address the needto mobilize international cooperation to improve knowledgeand innovation to address water security challenges;to strengthen the science policy interface to reach watersecurity at local, regional and global levels; and to developinstitutional and human capacities for water security andsustainability. Specific aspects of hydrology and humanneeds are identified in the plan: water-related disastersand hydrological changes; groundwater in a changingenvironment; addressing water scarcity and quality;water and human settlements of the future; ecohydrology– engineering harmony for a sustainable world; andeducation as a key to water security.It is very clear that the Panta Rhei initiative of IAHSand the 8th Phase of the IHP of UNESCO, commencingin 2014, not only overlap in timing but also, moreimportantly, coincide in purpose. IHP has, from itsinception in 1975, recognized the importance ofunderstanding hydrological processes as fundamentalto underpinning water resources management. IAHShas always worked very closely with IHP (and with thecomplementary programmes of WMO and IAEA andwith many of the other organizations within UN-Water)in a symbiotic relationship. IAHS and UNESCO workclosely with governments, with national and subnationalinstitutions, and with individual scientists,practitioners and policy makers. Cooperation of thissort and the principle of working together is of greatbenefit to society at large.[ 324 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHTen years of awarding innovationAbdulmalek A. Al Alshaikh, General Secretary, Prince Sultan Bin Abdulaziz International Prize for WaterOn 21 October 2002, His Royal Highness Prince SultanBin Abdulaziz – who at the time was Saudi Arabia’sCrown Prince, deputy prime minister, minister ofDefence and Aviation, and inspector general – announced thatnominations were open for a new scientific prize: the PrinceSultan Bin Abdulaziz International Prize for Water (PSIPW).Prince Sultan already had a long history of environmental activismin Saudi Arabia. In 1986, he established the National Commissionfor Wildlife Conservation and Development to protect the nation’sindigenous wildlife. In 1990, he became chairman of the SaudiMinisterial Committee for the Environment, which sets forth thenational strategy for environmental protection.PSIPW is Prince Sultan’s most far-reaching and global legacy.From the start, he envisioned it as a prize that would award scientificinnovation in water-related fields, and recognise scientists,inventors and organizations around the world for their efforts incombating the ever-growing problem of water scarcity. Now, tenyears on, PSIPW is realizing its founder’s dream of awarding themost relevant and innovative scientific breakthroughs that providereal solutions to fulfil humanity’s need for potable water.The Prize Council is headed by the founder’s son His RoyalHighness Prince Khalid Bin Sultan Bin Abdulaziz, who shares hisfather’s enthusiasm for environmental activism. After witnessing firsthandhow human activity is rapidly destroying the world’s coral reefs,he established the Khaled Bin Sultan Living Oceans Foundation in the2000 to advance his vision of ‘Science Without Borders’. Under itsauspices, his yacht fleet, led by Golden Odyssey and the support vesselGolden Shadow, is frequently employed in major scientific researchexpeditions, such as the Global Reef Expedition.The Prize Council is comprised of leading scholars fromaround the world. Although PSIPW is headquartered in Riyadh,Saudi Arabia, at King Saud University’s Prince Sultan Institutefor Environmental, Water and Desert Research, true to its internationalfocus the Prize Council holds its meetings in differentcities around the world in conjunction with various water events.PSIPW is open to nominations from researchers and researchorganizations working in all water-related areas. To ensure itattracts the best, most relevant nominations from around theworld, PSIPW offers a suite of five bi-annual prizes that cover theentire water research landscape:• The Creativity Prize is awarded to an innovator or pioneer fora breakthrough in any water-related field. It might be a body ofresearch, an invention, or a new patented technology• The Surface Water Prize covers every aspect of the study anddevelopment of surface water resources• The Groundwater Prize focuses on all aspects of the study anddevelopment of groundwater resources• The Alternative Water Resources Prize awardsinnovative work in desalination, wastewatertreatment and other non-traditional sources of water• The Water Management and Protection Prizecovers the use, management and protection ofwater resources.US$266,000 is allocated for the Creativity Prize, whileUS$133,000 is allocated for each of the four specializedwater prizes. Nominations are currently beingaccepted for the 6th Award, 2014 and are open until 31December 2013. All nominations can be made onlineat www.psipw.org.Nominations are evaluated by an internationalpanel of distinguished scientists, which serve onvarious specialized committees for each prize, startingwith the preliminary evaluation committee,followed by the referee committee and ending withthe final selection committee.Over the years, PSIPW has had the honour of awardingits various prizes to leading scholars in waterresearch, such as Dr Jery R. Stedinger, Dr HermanPSIPW was founded by HRH Prince Sultan Bin Abdulaziz(1930-2011) in 2002Image: PSIPW[ 325 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHBouwer, Dr Howard S. Wheater, Dr Patricia Gober, Dr WolfgangKinzelbach and many other prestigious water scientists. In 2010, atits 4th Award, PSIPW reached a turning point in its history whenit presented the Creativity Prize for the first time. This newly-inauguratedprize was shared by two teams of researchers for two verydifferent water-related achievements.One of the joint prizewinners of the 4th Award was the teamof Dr Marek Zreda (University of Arizona) and Dr Darin Desilets(Sandia National Laboratory, United States). They were awardedfor their groundbreaking work on the Cosmic Ray Probe, a technologythat uses cosmic-ray neutrons to measure soil moisturecontent and snow pack thickness over an area of tens of hectares– passively, non-invasively and economically. These measurementsprovide hydrologists and atmospheric scientists with an entirely newperspective on water near the interface between the ground and theatmosphere, as well as giving water managers, engineers and agriculturalistsan invaluable but economical new tool to monitor a criticalpart of the hydrologic cycle. Before their invention, measuring techniquesonly operated at the point scale (for example, invasive probesinserted into soil or snow) or at the kilometre scale (for example,satellite and airborne remote sensing images). However, manyhydrologic processes operate at a scale of tens to hundreds of metres– and it is this critical ‘blind spot’ that the Cosmic Ray Probe reveals.The second team to share the Creativity Prize was that ofDr Ignacio Rodriguez-Iturbe (Princeton University) and DrAndrea Rinaldo (École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausan).They were honoured for inventing and developing the scienceof Ecohydrology. Bridging the gap between the physical andlife sciences, Ecohydrology is a multi-disciplinary research fieldborrowing from a number of classic disciplines in the physicaland life sciences, which aims to achieve a unified picture ofwater-supported biological dispersion. In practical terms, this newresearch field presents itself as a comprehensive blend of theory(mathematical modelling), interpretation of past andpresent biological records, and field experimentation.The joint Princeton-Lausanne research group, whichthe two prizewinners built through years of collaboration,has produced exemplary work. Some of theirresearch shows how river networks act as ecologicalcorridors and how they influence the spread of awater-borne disease like cholera, which still plaguessociety today.Other 4th Award prize winners included Bart Vander Bruggen (Katholieke Universiteit, Leuven), whowon the Alternative Water Resources Prize for hiswork in the use of nanofiltration membrane technologyfor industrial water recycling; and Dr SorooshSorooshian (University of California, Irvine), whowon the Water Management and Protection Prize forhis development and refinement of the PrecipitationEstimation from Remotely Sensed Information usingArtificial Neural Networks (PERSIANN) system. Thisis a method that uses artificial neural networks – aform of artificial intelligence – and infrared (GOES IR)and TRMM satellite data to estimate global precipitationfrom remotely sensed data.Prizewinners for the 5th Award, 2012PSIPW again honoured major water-related innovativeresearch in its 5th Award. Dr Ashok Gadgil andhis team at the University of California, Berkeley, wonthe Creativity Prize for developing ElectrochemicalArsenic Remediation (ECAR), an innovative and effectivemethod of treating the arsenic contamination of5th Award: focus on arsenicHRH Prince Khaled Bin Sultan Bin Abdulaziz heads the Prize Council of PSIPWImage: PSIPWIn 2012, PSIPW recognized two research teams whose workrelates to the arsenic contamination of ground water, acrisis threatening the lives of millions of people worldwide –particularly in Bangladesh where it is causing what may bethe greatest mass poisoning in human history.Why is it happening? Dr Charles Franklin Harvey ofMIT and Dr Abu Borhan Badruzzaman of the BangladeshUniversity of Engineering and Technology won theGroundwater Prize for providing the answer. What theyfound, after a decade of painstaking research, is that arelatively recent shift in geochemical conditions is mobilizingarsenic from the sediments. Though the quantity ofarsenic is not particular large in the contaminated areas,a large proportion is being dissolved in the water, creatingtoxic concentrations. They also learned how land-usechanges and groundwater pumping affect arsenic levels.Understanding these processes provides guidance forwhere wells can be placed and how deep they need to be toextract safe water.The second critical question is: what can be done toprovide safe water for people in affected areas? Dr AshokGadgil and his team at the University of California, Berkleywon the Creativity Prize for developing an innovative,cost-effective method of treating arsenic contaminationusing electrocoagulation, ECAR. They did not stop withtechnological development. They also considered thedisposal of wastes and conducted a thorough analysis ofECAR’s implementation in society. The estimated priceof safe ground water at four US cents per ten litres iscomparatively low and acceptable even for the very poor.[ 326 ]
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON WATER SCIENCES AND RESEARCHPSIPW evaluation procedurePreliminaryscreeningEvaluationApprovalLegitimacy of nominatoraccording to guidelinesEligibility criteriafor nomineeSufficient qualityto warrant being evaluated50%20%30%OriginalityApplicabilityPotential impactAlignment with PSIPW visionIntegrity of evaluation processSource: PSIPWgroundwater using electrocoagulation. They produced a work offundamental and applied science running the complete course frominitial research to functioning prototype, while addressing one of themost serious drinking water problems confronting the human populationin developing countries. Currently, one in five adult deaths inBangladesh is caused by chronic arsenic poisoning.The Surface Water Prize was awarded to Dr Kevin Trenberthand Dr Aiguo Dai of America’s National Centre for AtmosphericResearch for groundbreaking work that provides a powerful estimateof the effects of climate change on the global hydrological cycle, witha clear explanation of the global water budget.The Groundwater Prize was awarded to Dr Charles FranklinHarvey (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) and Dr Abu BorhanMohammad Badruzzaman (Bangladesh University of Engineeringand Technology) for developing a complete diagnostic and conceptualmodel for understanding the arsenic contamination of groundwater. In doing so, they have answered a major puzzle in groundwaterhydrology and more generally demonstrated how complexnatural systems can be understood.Dr Mohamed Khayet Souhaimi (University Complutense,Madrid) won the Alternative Water Resources Prize for his workin pioneering and promoting membrane distillation for waterrecovery using alternative renewable energy sources. This processis relevant both for water recovery from alternative sources (notonly sea water but also concentrates from industrial production)and energy-friendly separation processes (using waste heat, forexample). The process is now being used for large-scale applicationsin Singapore and elsewhere. In many other countries, plansfor using this or related processes are mushrooming.Dr Damià Barceló (Catalan Institute for Water Research, Spain)won the Water Management and Protection Prize for work at theleading edge of water science in understanding the effect of pharmaceuticalsin the water environment. He also developed new methodsfor future risk assessment and the management of emerging contaminants,as well as for the investigation of water quality in intensivelyused basins. Dr Barceló’s research demonstrates that a broad spectrumof pharmaceuticals act as widespread pollutants in aquatic environmentsand shows that wastewater treatment plant outlets are majorcontributors to the problem. At the same time, his workhighlights how the final treatment steps in these plantscan considerably reduce the load of pharmaceuticalspollutants in outlets prior to their release, paving theway for more effective treatment processes to control theadverse impact of pharmaceutical pollutants.PSIPW’s other activitiesPSIPW is a non-profit, non-governmental organizationand though its primary purpose is to encouragescientific innovation through its suite of prizes, it alsopromotes a wide range of innovative water-related workaround the world. Among its most important activitiesare the following:• PSIPW is an observing member of the United Nations’Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space,which holds bi-annual meetings in Vienna• PSIPW is a member of the Arab Water Council’sBoard of Governors, and as such actively participatesin all of the council’s meetings and conferences. Italso provides support for some of the Arab WaterCouncil’s activities• PSIPW provides financing and support for the PrinceSultan Bin Abdulaziz International Prize’s Chair forWater Research located at the Prince Sultan Institutefor Environmental, Water and Desert Research• In cooperation with the United Nations, PSIPW hasrecently established the International Water Portal(http://water-portal.com), which aspires to becomethe world’s largest international interactive databasefor water research and will provide extensivenetworking opportunities for experts and organizationsworking in the field• PSIPW, along with King Saud University and theSaudi Ministry of Water and Electricity, organizes theInternational Conference on Water Resources andArid Environments bi-annually, in conjunction with thePSIPW awards ceremony• PSIPW, in conjunction with the United Nationsand other international organizations, arrangesthe International Conference on the Use of SpaceTechnology for Water Management, which is held invarious countries around the world.[ 327 ]
Notes and ReferencesI.Water DiplomacyTransboundary water cooperationThe author thanks colleagues in the UNECE Water Team: Sonja Koeppel, IuliaTrombitcaia, Alisher Mamadzhanov, Chantal Demilecamps and others.Greater cooperation through water diplomacy and transboundary water managementIn addition to the authors, we are grateful for contributions from Claire Warmenboland Rebecca Welling from the Global Water Programme, IUCN.From the Dead Sea to an Israel/Palestine Water Accord: 20 years of waterdiplomacy in the Middle East1. UNESCO Makes the Case for Water Diplomacy – Press Release from the UNESCOWebsite, 25/4/2012: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/media-services/single-view/news/unesco_makes_the_case_for_water_diplomacy/. Accessed 15/07/2013.2. Lawrence Susskind, Shafiqul Islam. ‘Water Diplomacy: Creating Value andBuilding Trust in Trans Boundary Water Negotiations’, in: Science andDiplomacy, Vol. 1, No. 3 (September 2012).For more information visit www.foeme.org.Transboundary water diplomacy in the Mekong regionFor further Mekong reading, from which this chapter is drawn, see:- Dore J and Lazarus K (2009) ‘Demarginalizing the Mekong River Commission’ inF Molle, T Foran and M Käkönen (eds.) Contested Waterscapes in the MekongRegion: Hydropower, Livelihoods and Governance. Earthscan, London, 357-382.- Dore J and Lebel L (2010) ‘Deliberation and scale in Mekong Region watergovernance’, Environmental Management 46:1, 60-80.- Dore J, Lebel L and Molle F (2012) ‘A framework for analyzing transboundarywater governance complexes, illustrated in the Mekong Region’, Journal ofHydrology 466-467, 23-36.- ICEM (2010) MRC Strategic Environmental Assessment of Hydropower on the MekongMainstream. Produced for Mekong River Commission by ICEM (International Centrefor Environmental Management). http://www.mrcmekong.org/ish/SEA.htm.- M-POWER (2011) M-POWER Strategic Guide 2011: Action-researchers, dialoguefacilitators, knowledge brokers. Mekong Program on Water Environment andResilience, Vientiane, 15. www.mpowernetwork.org.- Save the Mekong coalition: www.savethemekong.org.The Nile Basin Initiative: Advancing transboundary cooperation and supportingriparian communities1. NBI Shared Vision reads: “To achieve sustainable socioeconomic development throughthe equitable utilization of and benefit from the common Nile Basin Water resources”.II.Transboundary Water ManagementCooperation over transboundary aquifers: lessons learned from 10 years of experienceKirstin Conti is a PhD Research Fellow with the Amsterdam Institute of Social ScienceResearch at University of Amsterdam and the International Groundwater ResourcesAssessment Centre (IGRAC).Transboundary water management – why it is important and why it needs tobe developedThis paper is based on and has partly been published as the background paperprepared by Anders Jägerskog as part of UNDP Shared Waters Partnership Programmework for the Ministerial Roundtable on Transboundary Waters at the World WaterForum in Marseille, France, 13 March 2012.1. www.unwater.org/water-cooperation-2013/water-cooperation/facts-and-figures/en.2. UNDP (2006), ‘Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis’,Human Development Report (NY: UNDP).3. Phillips, D.J.H., M. Daoudy, J. Öjendal, S. McCaffrey and A.R. Turton. (2006).Trans-boundary Water Cooperation as a Tool for Conflict Prevention and BroaderBenefit-Sharing. Stockholm: Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs.4. Earle, A., Jägerskog, A. and Öjendal J., Eds., (2010) Transboundary WaterManagement: Principles and Practice. Earthscan, London (July 2010).5. Zeitoun, M and Jägerskog, A. (2011), Addressing Power Asymmetry: HowTransboundary Water Management May Serve to Reduce Poverty, Report Nr 29,SIWI, Stockholm.6. Zeitoun, M, and N. Mirumachi (2008) ‘Transboundary water interaction 1.Reconsidering conflict and cooperation’. International Environmental Agreements8: 297-316.7. Granit, J. and Claasen, M (2009) ‘A path towards realising tangible benefitsin transboundary river basins’, in Jägerskog, A and Zeitoun, M. GettingTransboundary Water Right: Theory and Practice for Effective Cooperation,Report Nr 25, SIWI, Stockholm.8. Zeitoun and Mirumachi (2008) op. cit.9. Earle, A. et al (2010) op. cit.10. Zeitoun and Mirumachi (2008) op. cit.11. Zeitoun, M and Jägerskog, A. (2011) op. cit.12. Falkenmark M., and Jägerskog, A., (2010) ‘Sustainability of Transnational WaterAgreements in the Face of Socio-Economic and Environmental Change’ in Earle,A., Jägerskog, A. and Öjendal, Eds., (2010) Transboundary Water Management:Principles and Practice. Earthscan, London (July 2010).13. Cotula, L. (2011), Land deals in Africa: What is in the contracts?, (London: IIED).14. Jägerskog, A., Cascao, A., Hårsmar, M. and Kim. K., (2012), Land Acquisitions:How Will They Impact Transboundary Waters? Report Nr. 30, SIWI, Stockholm.15. Allan, J.A (2011), Virtual Water: Tackling the Threat to Our Planet’s Most PreciousResource (London: I.B.Tauris).16. Mekong 2 Rio Message: www.mrcmekong.org/assets/Events/Mekong2Rio/Final-Mekong2Rio-Message.pdf.17. Nicol, A., van Steenbergen, F. et al., Transboundary Water Management as anInternational Public Good, Development Financing 2000 Study 2001:1 (Stockholm:for the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, 2001).18. Jägerskog, 2003.19. Jägerskog, 2003.20. Phillips, D.J.H., M. Daoudy, J. Öjendal, S. McCaffrey and A.R. Turton. (2006) op. cit.21. Jägerskog, 2007.22. Öjendal J., Earle, A. and Jägerskog, A. (2010), ‘Towards an ConceptualFramework for Transboundary Water Management’ in Earle, A., Jägerskog, A. andÖjendal, Eds., (2010) Transboundary Water Management: Principles and Practice.Earthscan, London (July 2010).Further reading:- Zeitoun, M. and Jägerskog, A. (2009) ‘Confronting Power: Strategies to SupportLess Powerful States’ in Jägerskog. A, and Zeitoun, M. (editors, 2009) GettingTransboundary Water Right: Theory and Practice for Effective Cooperation. Report Nr.25. SIWI, Stockholm.Cooperation on small rivers can make a difference1. IWMI: www.iwmi.cgiar.org.2. Regional Program for Sustainable Agricultural Development in Central Asia andthe Caucasus: http://cac-program.org/news.asp?id=257.3. CGIAR research centres: www.cgiar.org/cgiar-consortium/research-centers.4. IWMI in Central Asia: http://centralasia.iwmi.org.5. Oregon State University, International Freshwater Treaties Database: www.transboundarywaters.orst.edu/database/interfreshtreatdata.html.6. Solving a Rubik’s Cube: Water and security in Central Asia: www.iwmi.cgiar.org/News_Room/Archives/Water_and_Security_in_Central_Asia.7. www.transboundarywaters.orst.edu/database/interfreshtreatdata.html.Efficient and effective cooperation in the River Rhine catchment1. CHR is a permanent, autonomous international commission, registered as afoundation in the Netherlands. Its presidency alternates between the member states.In 2012, Professor Hans Moser of the Federal Institute of Hydrology in Koblenz,Germany, took over the presidency from Professor Manfred Spreafico of Switzerland,who had been President for 22 years. The CHR secretariat is permanently financedand hosted by the Netherlands and is carried out by Rijkswaterstaat in Lelystad.Each member state is represented by one official representative from a nationalhydrological institute. If desired, each country can delegate other representatives,for example from research institutes. CHR members meet twice a year to discussselected themes in detail, with the venue alternating between member states. Thesecretary of the International Commission for the Protection of the River Rhine(ICPR) and a WMO representative are invited to attend the meetings as observers,and CHR members take part in ICPR working or expert groups. Please contact theCHR secretariat for further information: info@chr-khr.org.2. From Jörg Uwe Belz, The discharge regime of the Rhine and its tributaries inthe 20th century – Analysis, Changes, Trends: http://www.khr-chr.org/files/Extended_Abstract_I_22_E.pdf.3. UNESCO-IHP report at: http://www.irtces.org/isi/isi_document/coming_event_ISI_LAC.pdf.4. The United Nations Environment Programme evaluation report dating fromOctober 2011 is available at: http://www.unep.org/eou/Portals/52/Reports/Bermejo_TE_Final_Report.pdf.[ 328 ]
Notes and References5. See final report at: http://www.khr-chr.org/files/CHR_I-23.pdf.6. The results and recommendations of these events are available through the CHRwebsite: www.chr-khr.org.Sharing water in Australia: a collaborative endeavour1. Australian Bureau of Statistics 2008, Water and the Murray-Darling Basin – AStatistical Profile, 2000–01 to 2005–06, Catalogue 4610.0.55.007, ABS.2. Land and Water Australia (2001), Australian Water Resources Assessment 2000.Surface water and groundwater — availability and quality, Canberra, p iv.3. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD environmentalperformance review 2007. Paris: OECD, 2008.4. State of the Environment 2011 Committee. Australia state of the environment2011. Independent report to the Australian Government Minister forSustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. Canberra:DSEWPaC, 2011.Regional water cooperation in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region: challengesand opportunitiesSuggested reading:- Babel, MS; Wahid, SM (2011) ‘Hydrology, management and rising watervulnerability in the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna River basin.’ Water International36 (3): 340-356.- Bajracharya, SR; Shrestha, B (eds) (2011) The status of glaciers in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan region. Kathmandu, Nepal: ICIMOD.- Bolch, T, Kulkarni, A, Kaab, A, Huggel, C, Paul, F, Cogley, JG, Frey, H, Kargel, JS,Fujita, K, Scheel, M, Bajracharya, S and Stoffel, M (2011) ‘The state and fate ofHimalayan glaciers.’ Science 336 (6079): 310-314.- Crow, B, Singh, N (2009) ‘The management of international rivers as demandsgrow and supplies tighten: India, China, Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh.’ IndiaReview 8: 306-339.- Rangachari, R and Verghese, BG (2001) ‘Making water work to translate povertyinto prosperity: The Ganga-Brahmaputra-Barak region.’ In Ahmad, QK, Biswas,Asit K, Rangachari, R; Sainju, MM (eds), Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna region:A framework for sustainable development, pp 81-142. Dhaka, Bangladesh: TheUniversity Press Limited.- Shrestha AB (2008) ‘Climate change in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas and its impactson water and hazards.’ ICIMOD APMN Bulletin (Newsletter of the Asia PacificMountain Network) 9: 1-5.- Vaidya, R (2012) ‘Water and hydropower in the green economy and sustainabledevelopment of the Hindu Kush-Himalayan region.’ Hydro Nepal: Journal ofWater, Energy and Environment 10: 11-19.The Mekong River Basin: practical experiences in transboundary water managementThis article is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the MRCmember countries’ views on the issues discussed. The author would also like toacknowledge the input of Ton Lennarts of the BDP and Lieven Geerinck of NAP.Mankind on the shores of Baikal: the transboundary ecosystem of Russia and Mongolia1. Timoshkin, O. A. ‘Lake Baikal: diversity of fauna, problems of its non-miscibilityand origin, ecology, and “exotic” groups’: Annotation list of Lake Baikal’s faunaand its catchment basin. Novosibirsk: Science (2001) 1:1. 17-73.2. Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of Baikal Lake Basin, April 2013.Libya’s experience in the management of transboundary aquifers- CEDARE. 2001. Regional Strategy for the Utilization of the Nubian SandstoneAquifer System. Draft Final Report.- OSS. 2002. Systeme Aquifere du Sahara Septentrional. Definition ET Realizationdes simulations exploratoires.- Salem, O. 2007. ‘Management of Shared Groundwater Basins in Libya’. AfricanWater Journal, Vol.1, No.1.- Salem, O. 2008. Transboundary Aquifer Resources Management – GeneralOverview and Objectives of the Conference. 3rd International Conference onManaging Shared Aquifer Resources in Africa; Tripoli 25-27 May 2008.- Salem, O. 2010. Challenges Facing the Management of Shared Aquifers. ISARM2010 International Conference on Transboundary Aquifers – Challenges and NewDirections. Paris 6-8 December 2010.- UN General Assembly. 2009. The Law of Transboundary Aquifers, A/Res/63/124.2. Kumamoto Prefecture (2009): Integrated Groundwater Reserve Management Plan.Digest Edition, 15p. (in Japanese).3. Shimada, J. (2008). Op. cit.4. Kumamoto Prefecture (2009). Op. cit.5. Kumamoto City (2008): Groundwater Recharge Project using Rice Paddy Fields.Pamphlet, 5p. (in Japanese).6. Endo, T. (2011): Public policy in connection with groundwater. Taniguchi, M. ed.Groundwater Flow, Kyoritsu Shuppan, Tokyo, 204-221. (in Japanese).Further reading:- Shimada, J. (2011): ‘Groundwater flow in Monsoon Asia’. Taniguchi, M. ed.Groundwater Flow, Kyoritsu Shuppan, Tokyo, 1-24. (in Japanese).- Japan Geotechnical Consultants Association (2008): Basic Concept on SustainableUtilization of Groundwater in the Urban Area. Pamphlet, 4p.Transboundary water management in the Zambezi and Congo river basins:a situation analysis- Chenov CD (1978) Groundwater Resources Inventory of Zambia. Unesco /NoradWater Zambia, pp. 1–21.- CMMU (1997) Community Management and Monitoring Report: Nationalwater point inventory and water point database. Ministry of Energy and WaterDevelopment, Lusaka, Zambia.- Government of the Republic of Zambia MEWD (1994, 2010) National WaterPolicy, Lusaka, Zambia.- Government of the Republic of Zambia MACO (2003) Strategic plan for IrrigationDevelopment, Period 2002-2006, Lusaka, Zambia.- Government of the Republic of Zambia MFNP (2006) Fifth National DevelopmentPlan, Period 2006-2010, Lusaka, Zambia.- JICA (1995) The Study on the National Water Resources Master Plan in TheRepublic of Zambia. Ministry of Energy and Water Development, YEC. Vol. 1–3.- NWASCO (2005-2011) Urban and Peri-urban Water Supply and Sanitation SectorReports, Lusaka, Zambia.- WRAP (2003) Report on the National Water Resources Action ProgrammeConsultative Forum: The Proposed Institutional and Legal Framework for the Use,Development and Management of Water Resources in Zambia, Ministry of Energyand Water Development, Water Resources Action Programme, Lusaka, Zambia,pp. 2–87.- WRAP (2003) Groundwater Management in Zambia, Discussion paper. Ministryof Energy and Water Development, Water Resources Action Programme, Lusaka,Zambia.- WRAP (2005) Zambia Water resources Management Sector Report for 2004,Water Resources Action Programme, Ministry of Energy and Water Development,Zambia, pp. 1–37.- World Bank (2009) Zambezi River Basin Multi-Sector Investment OpportunitiesAnalysis, Preliminary Report.Interactive open source information systems for fostering transboundarywater cooperation1. www.inweb.gr.2. Mantziou D. and Gletsos, M. (2011) The Development of TransboundaryCooperation in the Prespa Lakes Basin In: Ganoulis J. et al. (eds) TransboundaryWater Resources Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach, WILEY-VCH,Weinheim, pp 247-253.3. Ganoulis, J., Skoulikaris, H., and Monget, J.M. (2008) Involving Stakeholders InTransboundary Water Resources Management: The Mesta/Nestos ‘HELP’ Basin,Water SA Journal, Vol. 34 No. 4 (Special HELP edition), pp 461-467.Selected bibliography:- Ganoulis J., Aureli, A. & J. Fried (eds) (2011) Transboundary Water ResourcesManagement: A Multidisciplinary Approach, WILEY-VCH, Weinheim, 446 p.- INWEB (2008) Inventories of Transboundary Groundwater Aquifers in the Balkans,UNESCO Chair and Network INWEB, Thessaloniki, Greece www.inweb.gr.- UN WWDR (2006) Water: a shared responsibility, UNESCO Publishing, 7, Placede Fontenoy, Paris ISBN: 92-3-104006-5. www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr.- UN WWDR (2009) Water in a changing world, UNESCO Publishing, 7, Place deFontenoy, Paris ISBN: 978-9-23104-095-5. www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr.- World Bank (1987) Water Resources Management in South Eastern Europe,Volume I, Issues and Directions.Transboundary groundwater resources management implemented in theKumamoto region of Japan1. Shimada, J. (2008): ‘Sustainable management of groundwater resources for over700,000 residents in Kumamoto area, Japan’. Proceedings of Symposium onIntegrated Groundwater Sciences and Human Well-being, 36th IAH, Toyama,Japan, 104-111.[ 329 ]
Notes and ReferencesIII.Water Education and Institutional DevelopmentCapacity development for water cooperation1. UN-Water website: www.unwater.org.2. International Year of Water Cooperation 2013 website: www.watercooperation2013.org.3. Ardakanian, R., Sewilam, H., and Liebe, J. (eds), 2012, Mid-Term Proceedingson Capacity Development for the Safe Use of Wastewater in Agriculture. ACollaboration of UN-Water Members & Partners: Midterm proceedings.4. Further information on this multi-year project can be found at www.ais.unwater.org/wastewater.5. Bryant, E.A., 1991, Natural Hazards, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.6. Wilhite, D. A., 2011, ‘National Drought Policies: Addressing impacts and societalvulnerability’, in Sivakumar, M. V. K., Motha, R. P., Wilhite, D. A., and Qu, J. J.,2011 (eds.), Towards a Compendium on National Drought Policy: Proceedings ofan expert meeting, July 14-15, 2011, Washington DC., USA.7. Dai A., Trenberth, K.E., and Qian, T, 2004, ‘A global set of Palmer DroughtSeverity Index for 1870 to 2002: Relationship with soil moisture and effects ofsurface warming,’ in Journal of Hydrometeorology 5:1117-1130.8. Sivakumar, M. V. K., Motha, R. P., Wilhite, D. A., and Qu, J. J., 2011 (eds.),Towards a Compendium on National Drought Policy: Proceedings of an expertmeeting, July 14-15, 2011, Washington DC., USA.9. Further reading at www.ais.unwater.org/droughtmanagement.Coping with extreme weather and water-related disasters1. Takara, K. and H. Hayashi, ‘Extreme Weather and Water-Related Disasters: A KeyIssue for the Sustainability and Survivability of Our Society,’ Journal of DisasterResearch, Fuji Technology Press, Tokyo, Japan, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 3-6, 2013.2. See www.waterforum.jp/en/what_we_do/pages/grass_roots_activities.php#fund.3. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO),International Hydrological Programme (IHP) Eighth Phase ‘Water Security:Responses to Local, Regional, and Global Challenges’ Strategic Plan, IHP-VIII2014-2021, Final Version, August 2012.4. Takara, K., ‘Sustainability/Survivability Science for a Resilient Society Adaptableto Extreme Weather Conditions,’ Asian Journal of Environment and DisasterManagement, Research Publishing Services, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 123-136, 2011.The Regional Centre for Training and Water Studies of Arid and Semi-arid Zones1. International Irrigation Management Institutes, Sri Lanka An Action Plan forStrengthening Irrigation Management in Egypt. Final Report, 1995.2. Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation, WPRP/USAID Water Policy Reviewand Integration Study. Working Paper, 2002.3. The World Bank USAID, Irrigation Training in the Public Sector, 1989.4. Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation, Training Needs Assessment Study(Phase 1), Egypt, Water Policy Reform project, Report No. 73, 2003.5. Regional Center for Training and Water Studies, National Training Plan 2009-2010.HidroEX Foundation – an example of water cooperation1. HidroEX is a UNESCO Category II Center formally approved in October 2009and currently under development in the City of Frutal, Minas Gerais, Brazil. It willeventually offer post graduate education to students from Brazil, Latin Americaand Portuguese-speaking African nations in-line with the overall guidelines of theIHP and in coordination with UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.2. UNESCO, International Hydrological Programme. 2012. Draft Strategic Plan ofthe Eighth Phase of the IHP (2014-2021), IHP/IC-XX/Inf.4. Paris, 4-7 June.Application of water directives in small settlements1. Water Framework Directive: Directive 2000/60/EC; Floods Directive: Directive2007/60/EC; Renewable Energy Directive: Directive 2009/28/EC.2. Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive: Directive 91/271/EEC.Speaking so that people understand: integrated water resources managementin Guatemala1. Colom, E. 2004 The State of Water in the Naranjo River Basin, in press.2. Morataya, M., Pérez, O. 2007 Action plans for the municipalities of the UpperNaranjo River Basin, 150 pp.3. Aragón, G. 2006 Governance Report of the components under the project ‘IntegratedManagement of Water Resources in the top of the Naranjo River Basin’, in press.4. Herrera, N. 2007. Strategic Plan for the Natural Resources Coordinator of SanMarcos. 30 pp.5. Restrepo, I. 2001 Team Learning Projects and Demonstration, CINARA /UNIVALLE Cali, Colombia.Further reading:- Gil Joram, 2011 Strategy for the construction of the organizational framework forthe water management in the upper part of the Naranjo River Basin.- Mux, V. 2006. Narrative Report for the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlandsin the framework of the project ‘Integrated Water Resources Management’.- Mux Caná, V. L.; Tovar, R.; Orozco, J. 2007 Building from the grassroots theguiding framework and management models for water and sanitation, Tikalia,FAUSAC.- Orozco, E. 2007 Hydrological Study of the Upper Naranjo River Basin.Integrated water resources management in Peru through shared vision planning1. ‘To the barricades: The politics of non-stop protest’. The Economist. 4December 2008.2. Lorie, M.A. and Cardwell, H.E. 2006. ‘Collaborative Modeling for WaterManagement’. Southwest Hydrology. July/August 2006. pp26-27.3. Congreso del Peru 2009. Ley de Recursos Hídricos, Ley N° 29338. Mar, 2009.IV.Financing CooperationRegional cooperation in the water and sanitation sector: Latin America and the Caribbean1. The term ‘region’ refers to the Latin American and Caribbean countries, includingIDB non-member countries.2. The MDGs consider safe or improved sources of drinking water to be piped waterservices (piped connections to a dwelling, plot or yard and other improved sourcesprotected from outdoor contamination, such as taps or public water sources, boreholeor drilled wells, protected dug wells, protected sources and rainwater collection.3. Improved sanitation includes facilities that ensure hygienic separation of humanexcreta from human contact. Among them: a toilet/latrine with a tank or siphonconnected to a piped sewer system, a septic tank or a pit latrine; a ventilatedimproved pit latrine; a pit latrine with slab; a composting toilet.4. Perroni, Alejandra et.al, Drinking water, sanitation and the MillenniumDevelopment Goals in Latin America and the Caribbean.5. Water and Sanitation Initiative of the Inter-American Development Bank, 2007.Available at: iadb.org/water.6. The Fund has two windows. One of them is directly managed by the Spanish Agencyfor International Cooperation for Development (AECID) with the recipient countries,and the other one is managed by IDB on behalf of the Spanish Government.7. Headquarters and field offices of AECID and IDB and executing entities.8. US$ 581 million of contribution of the donation fund, US$ 342 million of loansgranted by IDB and US$ 196 million of local contributions.Governance for cooperation and successful watershed conservation strategies: theWater Funds case1. www.unwater.org/statistics_pollu.html.V.Legal Framework at theNational/International LevelIntegrated water resource management – combining perspectives from law,policy and scienceThe chapter by the Dundee Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science is based on aPolicy Brief prepared for and funded by the UK National Commission for UNESCO.Community benefits achieved through developing legal frameworks at domesticand transboundary levels1. S. Burchi, M. Nanni, ‘How groundwater ownership and rights influence groundwaterintensive use management’, in Intensive Use of Groundwater – Challenges andOpportunities, R. Llamas and E. Custodio editors, Balkema, 2003, p. 230.2. S. Hendry, ‘The implementation of the Groundwater Directive in Spain – LegalAnalysis of the GENESIS case study’, in The Journal of Water Law, vol.22, issue 4(2011), p. 166.3. J. Razzaque, ‘Public participation in water governance’, in The Evolution of the Lawand Politics of Water, J. Dellapenna, J. Gupta editors, Springer, 2008, p. 362-363.4. G. de los Cobos, ‘Transboundary water resources and international law: theexample of the aquifer management of the Geneva region (Switzerland and[ 330 ]
Notes and ReferencesFrance)’, in International Law and Freshwater – The Multiple Challenge, L.Boisson de Chazournes, C. Leb, and M. Tignino editors, Elgar, 2013, p. 179-195.5. U. Alam, ‘India and Pakistan’s truculent cooperation: can it continue?’, inInternational Law and Freshwater – The Multiple Challenge, L. Boisson deChazournes, C. Leb, and M. Tignino editors, Elgar, 2013, p. 420.6. M. M. Mbengue, ‘The Senegal River legal regime and its contribution to thedevelopment of the law of international watercourses in Africa’, in InternationalLaw and Freshwater – The Multiple Challenge, L. Boisson de Chazournes, C. Leb,and M. Tignino editors, Elgar, 2013, p. 217-236.New approaches to planning and decision-making for fresh water: cooperativewater management in New Zealand1. Howard-Williams, C., R. Davies-Colley, K. Rutherford and R. Wilcock (2011)‘Diffuse pollution and freshwater degradation: New Zealand Perspectives’ inPlenary Proceedings of the IWA Diffuse Pollution Conference, Quebec, Canada,Sept 2010. OECD, and reprinted in 2012 in Water 172, 56-66.2. New Start for Fresh Water, (2009). New Zealand Government decision paper– Ministry for the Environment: www.mfe.govt.nz/issues/water/freshwater/newstart-fresh-water.html.3. KPMG Agribusiness Agenda: Realising global potential (2010): www.kpmg.com/NZ/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/agribusiness-agenda/Documents/Agribusiness-Agenda-2011.pdf.4. Land and Water Forum (2010). Land and Water Forum First Report: Fresh startfor fresh water: www.landandwater.org.nz.5. Salmon, G W (2007). ‘Collaborative governance for sustainable development:Lessons from the Nordic countries’. NZ Surveyor 297, 36-40.6. Land and Water Forum (2012). Land and Water Forum Second Report: Settinglimits for water quality and quantity; Freshwater policy and plan-making throughcollaboration: www.landandwater.org.nz.7. Land and Water Forum (2012). Land and Water Forum Third Report: Managingwater quality and allocating water: www.landandwater.org.nz.8. CWMS (2009). Canterbury Water Management Strategy: Strategic Framework.Published by Canterbury Mayoral Forum and Environment Canterbury: www.ecan.govt.nz.9. CWMS (2009). Canterbury Water Management Strategy: Strategic Framework.Ibid.10. Environment Canterbury (2011). Canterbury water – the regional context.Supporting the Canterbury Water Management Strategy: www.ecan.govt.nz/getinvolved/Canterburywater/Key documents/Pages/CWMS.aspx.The US-Mexico institutional arrangement for transboundary water governance1. US Chamber of Commerce (2010) Steps to a 21st Century U.S.-Mexico Border. AU.S. Chamber of Commerce Border Report.2. Aparicio J., Ortega E., Hidalgo J., Aldama A. (2009) Water resources in thenorthern border. Mexican Institute of Water Technology. Mexico. (In Spanish).3. Utilization of waters of the Colorado en Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio GrandeTreaty between the United States and Mexico. Signed at Washington February 3,1944, and Protocol signed at Washington November 14, 1944. Treaty Series 994,US Dept. of State. US Government printing office. Washington 1946.4. EPA (2013). US-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program. Annual Report2012. United States Environmental Agency. EPA-830-R-13-001.VI.Water Cooperation, Sustainabilityand Poverty EradicationManaging water: from local wisdom to modern science1. Geertz,1972; Lansing, 1991; Pitana, 1993; Sutawan, 2000.Water for life: inspiring action and promoting best practices in local cooperation1. Butterworth et al, 2007.2. Source: Sanz, M. & Osorio, L. (2011).3. Source: ECODES, Zaragoza, Spain.International water cooperation1. Fishman, Charles. The big thirst: the secret life and turbulent future of water.New York: Free Press, 2011.2. Barcelona forced to import emergency water, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/14/spain.water (accessed 26 July 2003).3. Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds, National Intelligence Council. http://info.publicintelligence.net/GlobalTrends2030.pdf (accessed 26 July 2003).4. ‘IEA - Water-Energy Nexus’. IEA - World Energy Outlook. http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/resources/water-energynexus/ (accessed 26 July 2013).5. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAO StatisticalYearbook 2013. FAO.org. http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3107e/i3107e00.pdf(accessed 26 July 2013).6. 24 May 2013 # Climate Damage Costs http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130524-australia-extreme-weather-climate-change-heat-wavescience-world.7. 15 March 2013 # Water Crisis Loss http://m.upi.com/story/UPI-67421363375974.8. 13 April 2013 # Climate Food Starvation Agriculture m.guardian.co.uk/globaldevelopment/2013/apr/13/climate-change-millions-starvation-scientists.9. World confronts serious water crisis, former heads of government and expertswarn in new report. InterAction Council. http://www.interactioncouncil.org/world-confronts-serious-water-crisis-former-heads-government-and-experts-warnnew-report(accessed 26 July 2013).10. World Economic Forum. Global Risks 2013 Eighth Edition. World EconomicForum Insight Report. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GlobalRisks_Report_2013.pdf (accessed 26 July 2013).11. ‘Transboundary waters/International Decade for Action “Water for Life” 2005-2015.’ Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World. http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/transboundary_waters.shtml (accessed 26 July 2013).12. Transboundary Waters Programme. United Nations Development Programme. http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/ourwork/environmentandenergy/focus_areas/water_and_ocean_governance/transboundary-waters (accessed 26 July 2013).13. ‘Transboundary waters/International Decade for Action “Water for Life” 2005-2015’ op cit.14. Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Global Water Security. IntelligenceCommunity Assessment. https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/327371/report-warns-that-water-shortages-could-threaten.pdf(accessed 26 July 2013): ii.15. ‘Global Water Security’ Intelligence Community Assessment ICA 2012-08, 2February 2012. http://www.hydrology.nl/images/docs/alg/2012.03_Global_Water_Security.pdf.16. Clapper, James R. Worldwide Threat Assessment of the US IntelligenceCommunity. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/DNI_threat-assessment-2013.pdf(accessed 26 July 2013).17. van der Veen, ‘L’etat du Rhin’, Report of the Conference interparlementaire sur lapollution du Rhin 10 (24-25February 1977) in Kiss, Alexandre ‘The protection ofthe Rhine against pollution’. Natural Resources Journal, Vol 25, July 1985 – seehttp://lawlibrary.unm.edu/nrj/25/3/03_kiss_protection.pdf.18. Kiss, Alexandre ‘The protection of the Rhine against pollution’. Natural ResourcesJournal, Vol 25, July 1985 – see http://lawlibrary.unm.edu/nrj/25/3/03_kiss_protection.pdf.Assessment of Lebanon’s shared water resources and the need for effective cooperation1. Beydoun, Z., 1977. Petroleum prospects of Lebanon: re-evaluation. AmericanAssociation of Petroleum Geologists, 61, 43-64.2. Shaban, A. 2003. Etude de l’hydroélogie au Liban Occidental: Utilisation de latélédétection. PhD dissertation. Bordeaux 1 Université. 202p.3. Shaban, A. 2011. ‘Analyzing climatic and hydrologic trends in Lebanon’. Journalof Environmental Science and Engineering, No.3, Vol. 5, 2011.4. ADB (Asian Development Bank). 2008. Shared water resources. Whosewater, available at: http://www.bgr.bund.de/nn_459046/EN/Themen/TZ/Politikberatung__GW/Downloads/klingbeil__transboundarygw,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/klingbeil_transboundarygw.pdf.5. Shaban, A. and Douglas, E. 2008. Transboundary water resources of Lebanon:Monitoring and assessment. Regional Meeting on Water in the MediterraneanBasin. University of Near East. Lefkosa. North Cyprus, 9-11/10/2008.6. Comair, F. 2008. ‘Gestion et hydroplomatic de l’eau au Proche-Orient’.L’Orient du Jour.Alternative water resources in agriculture for improving productionand poverty reduction1. Stenhouse J. and Kijne J. W. (2006). Prospects for productive use of saline waterin West Asia and North Africa. Comprehensive Assessment Research Reportno.11. Colombo, Sri Lanka: Comprehensive Assessment Secretariat.2. ICBA: www.biosaline.org.ae.[ 331 ]
Notes and ReferencesManaging water, sustainability and poverty reduction through collectivecommunity action1. Falkenmark M, Rockstrom J (2004) Balancing Water for Humans and nature,Earthscan Publications, London.2. Rockstrom J, Nuhu Hatibu, Theib Oweis and Wani SP. 2007. ‘Managing Waterin Rainfed Agriculture’ in Water for Food, Water for Life: A ComprehensiveAssessment of Water Management in Agriculture (ed. David Molden). London,UK: Earthscan and Colombo, Srilanka: IWMI. Pages 315-348.3. Wani SP, Sreedevi TK, Rockström J and Ramakrishna YS. 2009. ‘Rainfedagriculture: Past trend and future prospects’. In: Wani S.P, Rockström J andOweis T (eds) Rain-fed agriculture: Unlocking the Potential. ComprehensiveAssessment of Water Management in Agriculture Series. CAB International,Wallingford, UK. Pages 1-35.4. Wani SP, Yin Dixin, Zhong Li, Dar WD and Girish Chander, 2012. ‘Enhancingagricultural productivity and rural incomes through sustainable use of naturalresources in the semi-arid tropics’. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,92. Pages 1054–1063.5. Rockstrom J, Louise Karlberg, Wani SP, Jenni Barron, Nuhu Hatibu, TheibOweis, Adriana Bruggeman, Jalali Farahani and Zhu Qiang. 2010. ‘Managingwater in rainfed agriculture – The need for a paradigm shift’. Agricultural WaterManagement. 97: 543-550.6. Wani SP, Ramakrishna YS, Sreedevi TK, Long TD, Thawilkal Wangkahart,Shiferaw B, Pathak P and Keshava Rao AVR. 2006. ‘Issues, Concept, ApproachesPractices in the Integrated Watershed Management: Experience and lessons fromAsia. In: Integrated Management of Watershed for Agricultural Diversification andSustainable Livelihoods in Eastern and Central Africa: Lessons and Experiencesfrom Semi-Arid South Asia. Proceedings of the International Workshop heldduring 6-7 December 2004 at Nairobi, Kenya, pages 17-36.7. Sreedevi TK, Shiferaw B and Wani SP. 2004. Adarsha watershed in Kothapally:understanding the drivers of higher impact. Global Theme on AgroecosystemsReport no. 10. Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: ICRISAT. 24 pp.8. Sahrawat KL, Rego TJ, Wani SP and Pardhasaradhi G. 2008. ‘Stretching soilsampling to watersheds: Evaluation of soil-test parameters in a semi-arid tropicalwatershed’. Communication in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 39: 2950-2960.9. Wani SP, Joshi PK, Raju KV, Sreedevi TK, Mike Wilson, Amita Shah, Diwakar PG,Palanisami K, Marimuthu S, Ramakrishna YS, Meenakshi Sundaram SS, MarcellaD’Souza (2008). Community Watershed as Growth Engine for Development ofDry land Areas: A Comprehensive Assessment of Watershed Programs in India.Patancheru 502324, AP, India, ICRISAT.10. Government of India. 2008. Common guidelines for watershed developmentprojects. Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development,Government of India, New Delhi.11. Garg K.K. and Wani S.P. 2012. Opportunities to build groundwater resilience inthe semi-arid tropics. Groundwater, DOI-10.1111/j.1745-6584.2012.01007.12. Sreedevi TK, Wani SP, Sudi R, Patel MS, Jayesh T, Singh SN and Tushah Shah.2006. On-site and Off-site Impact of Watershed Development: A Case Study ofRajasamadhiyala, Gujarat, India. GTAES Report No. 20. Patancheru 502324, AP,India: ICRISAT. 48 pp.Figure Sources:- Wani SP, Sreedevi TK, Sudi R, Pathak P and Marcella D’Souza. 2010. GroundwaterManagement an Important Driver for Sustainable Development and Managementof Watersheds in Dryland Areas. 2nd National Ground Water Congress. Govt. ofIndia. Ministry of Resources. 22 March 2010. New Delhi. pp. 195-209.- Kaushal K. Garg and Suhas P. Wani. 2012 Opportunities to Build GroundwaterResilience in the Semi-Arid Tropics. GROUNDWATER, National GroundWaterAssociation. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2012.01007.x.A blueprint for sustainable groundwater management in Balochistan, Pakistan1. Custodio, E., Kretsinger, V. and Llamas, M.R. (2005). ‘Intensive development ofgroundwater: concept, facts and suggestions’. Water Policy 7, 151–162.2. Shah, T., Roy, A.D., Qureshi, A.S. and Wang, J. (2003). ‘Sustaining Asia’s groundwaterboom: an overview of issues and evidence’. Natural Resources Forum 27, 130–141Mukherji, A. and Shah, T. (2005). ‘Groundwater socio-ecology and governance:a review of institutions and polices in selected countries’. Hydrogeology Journal13, 328–345Shah, T., Singh, O.P. and Mukherji, A. (2006). ‘Some aspects of South Asia’sgroundwater irrigation economy: analyses from a survey in India, Pakistan, NepalTerai and Bangladesh’. Hydrogeology Journal (2006) 14: 286–309Qureshi, A.S., Gill, M.A. and Sarwar, A. (2010). ‘Sustainable groundwatermanagement in Pakistan: challenges and opportunities’. Irrigation and Drainage59, 107–116.3. Khair, M.S, Mushtaq, S., Culas, R.J. and Hafeez, M. (2012). ‘Groundwatermarkets under the water scarcity and declining watertable conditions: the uplandBalochistan Regiona of Pakistan’. Agricultural Systems 107, 21–32.4. Van Steenbergen, F. and Oliemens, W. (2002). ‘A review of polices ingroundwater management in Pakistan 1950–2000’. Water Policy 4, 323–344Van Steenbergen, F. (2006). ‘Promoting local management in groundwater’.Hydrogeology Journal 14, 380–391Theesfeld, I. (2010). ‘Institutional challenges for national groundwater governance:policies and issues’. Ground Water 48, 131–142. Khair et al (2012) op cit.5. Van Steenbergen (2006) op cit. Altaf, Z., Jasra, A.W., Aujla, K.M. and Khan S.A.(1999). ‘Implication of government policies on water resources developmentand management for value added agriculture in western mountains of Pakistan’.International Journal of Agriculture & Biology 3, 154–158. Mustafa, D. andQazi, M.U. (2007). ‘Transition from karez to tubewell irrigation: development,modernization and social capital in Balochistan, Pakistan’. World Development35, 1796–1813.6. Gardner, R., Ostrom, E. and Walker, J.M. (1990). ‘The nature of common-poolresource problems’. Rationality and Society 2, 335–358. Madani, K. and Dinar,A. (2011). ‘Policy implications of institutional arrangements for sustainablemanagement of common pool resources: the case of groundwater’. BearingKnowledge for Sustainability, World Environmental and Water ResourcesCongress 2011, 981.7. Karezes are manmade sub-surface horizontal tunnels/galleries constructed to tapgroundwater in the upper limits of the valley floor/piedmont plan and eventuallydeliver it at lower level lands by gravity. A well called the mother well is dug nearthe foot of the mountain where groundwater is available. This is followed by aseries of wells at intervals of 60-100 metres; all of these wells are connected by anunderground tunnel. Source: Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA)(1993). Groundwater resources of Balochistan Province, Pakistan. WAPDA, Lahore.8. Van Steenbergen (2006) op cit.9. Altaf et al (1999) op cit. Verheijen, O. (1998). Community irrigation systems inthe Province of Balochistan. International Water Management Institute, Lahore.10. Qureshi et al (2010) op cit.11. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN)Pakistan and Government of Balochistan (2000). Balochistan conservationstrategy. Karachi, Pakistan: IUCN Pakistan and Government of Balochistan.12. Nielsen, H.Ø., Frederiksen, P., Saarikoski, H., Rytkönen, A.-M. and Pedersen, A.B.(2013). ‘How different institutional arrangements promote integrated river basinmanagement. Evidence from the Baltic Sea Region’. Land Use Policy 30, 437–445.Nesheim, I., McNeill, D., Joy, K.J., Manasi, S., Nhung, D.T.K., Portela, M.M. andParanjape, S. (2010). ‘The challenge and status of IWRM in four river basins inEurope and Asia’. Irrigation and Drainage Systems 24, 205–221.13. Pahl-Wostl, C. and Kranz, N. (2010). ‘Water governance in times of change’.Environmental Science & Policy 13, 567–570.Image source:- ‘Groundwater governance, tubewell development projects and policies over time’image source:- Khair M.S (2013). The Efficacy of Groundwater Markets on AgriculturalProductivity and Resource Use Sustainability: Evidence from the UplandBalochistan Region of Pakistan. Unpublished PhD thesis, Charles Sturt University,Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia.Environmental rehabilitation of the Lake Pátzcuaro watershed, Michoacán, MexicoEnglish translation: Emilio García Díaz, IMTA.1. The workshop was based on a popular hide-and-seek game where children hidefrom the seeker and then, by cooperating in distracting the seeker one of themtries to avoid him/her in order to reach a previously-agreed ‘safe spot’ yelling“one, two, three for me and all my friends” – thus being safe from the seeker andsaving all the other members of the team. The idea here is to teach children tocooperate to save the watershed.Preparing Denmark for climate changesThe Prepared project: www.prepared-fp7.eu; Aarhus Vand: www.aarhusvand.dkDeveloping community water services and cooperation in Finland and the South1. Finnish Water Forum: www.finnishwaterforum.fi/fi/etusivu/Examples of cooperation in the Czech Republic flood forecastingand information service1. http://hydro.chmi.cz/hpps.2. Scientec, Flussmanagement GmbH. (2007) Feasibility study – Langfrist-Hochwasserprognose March, Brno, St. Pölten, Bratislava, Linz.3. Starý, M. (1991–2008) ‚HYDROG – Program system for the simulation, operativeforecast and operative control of water runoff during the passage of floods‘.Táborská 110, Brno, Czech Republic. www.hysoft.cz.Better late than never1. World Conference on Cultural Policies (MONDIACULT), Mexico City, 06 August1982: http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/files/12762/11295421661mexico_en.pdf/mexico_en.pdf.[ 332 ]
Notes and References2. Global Network of Water Anthropology for Local Action. Paris, UNESCO, 2005:http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001459/145948e.pdf.3. See: www.netwa-bamako.org.4. The centre was inaugurated with the support of a Niger-Loire Project orchestratedby Bamako UNESCO Cluster Office (of Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali and Niger) inBamako, and of the World Heritage Centre (UNESCO Headquarters, Paris).5. http://etudesafricaines.revues.org/14398.VII.Economic Development and WaterWater cooperation for sustainable utilization: Lake Naivasha, KenyaAuthor details:- Professor David M. Harper, Dr Caroline Upton and Dr Ed Morrison, Centre forLandscape & Climate Research, University of Leicester, UK.- Dr Nic Pacini, Centre for Landscape & Climate Research, University of Leicesterand University of Calabria, Arcavacata di Rende (CS), Italy.- Mr Richard Fox, Sustainability Director, Finlays Horticulture Kenya Ltd andChairman, Imarisha Naivasha, Kenya.- Mr Enock Kiminta, Pastoralists Outreach Services & Lake Naivasha Water ResourceUser Association, Naivasha.The authors all work together on the research and sustainable management of LakeNaivasha, through Imarisha, which is a unique private-public-people partnership forthe sustainable future of the entire basin.Water resources management as an engine for economic growth in theRepublic of Korea1. CIA, ‘Korea, South’, The World Factbook, last updated May 7, 2013, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ks.html.2. Jeok-gyo Kim, Korean Economic Development, Seoul: PYBook, 2012, 2.3. See for example Kim, Korean Economic Development (ibid), 8.4. Kim, Korean Economic Development (op cit), 23.5. Ibid, 79-80.6. Ibid, 35-6.7. Ibid, 38.8. Kim, Korean Economic Development (op cit), 47.9. Ibid, 52, Table 2-14.10. MOCT, Water Vision 2020, 2001, 34.11. Korea Times, ‘People, Nature Converge at 4 Major Rivers’, July 19, 2012, www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/special/2012/07/370_115502.html.12. Ministry of Environment, Water Resources of Korea, accessed June 7, 2013,http://eng.me.go.kr/content.do?method=moveContent&menuCode=pol_wat_sta_korea.13. Kyung-Jin Min, ‘The Role of the State and the Market in the Korean WaterSector: Strategic Decision Making Approach for Good Governance’, PhD thesis,University of Bath, 2011, 266-68.14. Min, ‘The Role of the State and the Market’, 263-65.15. Kim, Korean Economic Development, 45.16. Saemaeul Undong (New Village Movement), Nate Baekgwasajeon, accessed June5, 2013, http://100.nate.com/dicsearch/pentry.html?s=K&i=297273&v=45.17. Korea Water Resources Corporation, Hankuk Soojawongongsa 25Nyeonsa (KoreaWater Resources Corporation 25-Year History), Daejeon: Korea Water ResourcesCorporation, 1994, 314.18. NewsPim, ‘Jeongbu, Gimpo-si Hasudo Siseol(BTO)e 174eog Won Jeungeg’(‘Government, Gimpo City Sewerage Facilities Increase in Cost by 17.4 billionWon’), May 10, 2013, www.newspim.com/view.jsp?newsId=20130510000797.19. Jungbu Ilbo, ‘Gunja Sindosi, “Bangsan Hasudo Siseol” Mingantujasaeob(BTO) Hwakjeong’ (‘Gunja New City, “Complete Sewerage Facilities” PrivateSector BTO Confirmed’), July 25, 2012, www.joongboo.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=799861.20. CNews, ‘Gonggong Hasudo Mingan Saeobjaga “Chaegim Daehaeng”…“Unyeong Siljeok Ssaha Haeoe Jinchul”’ (‘Private Operators of PublicSewerage “Gain [Public] Responsibility”… “Earn Performance Credibility toExpand Overseas”’), January 14, 2013, www.cnews.co.kr/uhtml/read.jsp?idxno=201301141528218490140.21. K-water, 2012 Annual Report, http://english.kwater.or.kr/, 23.Integrated urban water frameworks for emerging cities in sub-Saharan Africa1. United Nations (2012). The Millenium Development Goals Report 2012.2. UNFPA. (2007). State of the World Population. ‘People in Cities: HopeCountering Desolation’ (Chapter 2). http://www.unfpa.org/swp/2007/english/chapter_2.UN_HABITAT and UNEP (2010). The state of African Cities 2010: Governance,Inequality and Urban land markets http://www.unhabitat.org/documents/SOAC10/SOAC-PR1-en.pdf (Accessed 30 July 2013).3. Jacobsen, M., Webster, M., Vairavamoorthy K. (ed.) (2012). The Future of Waterin African Cities: Why Waste Water? The World Bank, Washington DC 2012.4. Sharma, S. and Vairavamoorthy, K. (2009). ‘Urban Water Demand Management:Prospects and Challenges for the Developing Countries.’ Journal of Water andEnvironmental Management, Vol 23(3), pp 210-218.5. Vairavamoorthy, K., Eckart, J., Ghebremichael, K., Khatri, K., Tsegaye, S, Kizito,F., Mutikanga, H., Rabaça J. (2012). Final Report - Integrated Urban Watermanagement for Mbale, Uganda, Prepared for the World Bank, April 2012.6. Ulrich, A., Reuter, S., and Gutterer, B. (2009). Decentralized WastewaterTreatment System (DEWATS) and Sanitation in Developing Countries: A PracticalGuide. Water Engineering and Development Centre (WEDC), LoughboroughUniversity of Technology, UK.Further reading:- Pilgrim, N. R. (2007). Water Working Notes: Principles of Town Water Supply andSanitation, Part 1: Water Supply. Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Board of theInfrastructure Network, World Bank Group.- Vairavamoorthy, K., Gorantiwar, S.D. and Mohan, S. (2007). ‘Intermittentwater supply under water scarcity situations’, Water International, Vol. 32 (1):pp 121 -132.Water resources management on the island of Crete: lessons learned1. M. A. Mimikou, E. Baltas, E. Varanou, and K. Pantazis, ‘Regional impacts ofclimate change on water resources quantity and quality indicators’, Journal ofHydrology, 234 [1-2] 95-109 (2000).2. M. S. Krol, M. J. de Vries, P. R. van Oel, and J. C. de Araújo, ‘Sustainability ofSmall Reservoirs and Large Scale Water Availability Under Current Conditionsand Climate Change’, Water Resources Management, 25 [12] 3017-26 (2011).O. Tzoraki, G. Dörflinger, C. Dimitriou, and P. Polykarpou, Controlling Pollution Riskof an important Drinking Water Reservoir in a strongly human altered and climaticallyinduced semi-arid environment, 3rd International Conference on Industrial andHazardous Waste Management, 10-14 September [Chania, Crete] (2012).3. Lanen et al., 2007.4. Greek statistical service, 2011.5. N. P. Nikolaidis, F. Bouraoui, and G. Bidoglio, ‘Hydrologic and geochemicalmodeling of a karstic Mediterranean watershed’, Journal of Hydrology, 477 [0]129-38 (2013).6. E. A. Baltas and M. A. Mimikou, ‘The Water Framework Directive for theDetermination of New Hydrologic Prefectures in Greece’ , New Medit, V [3]59-64 (2006).7. S. Naoum and I. K. Tsanis, ‘Temporal and spatial variation of annual rainfall onthe island of Crete, Greece’, Hydrological Processes, 17 [10] 1899-922 (2003).8. A. N. Angelakis, Y. M. Sawakis, and G. Charalampakis, Aqueducts during theMinoan era, pp. 95-101. in, Vol. 7. 2007.9. A. G. Koutroulis, I. K. Tsanis, I. N. Daliakopoulos, and D. Jacob, ‘Impact ofclimate change on water resources status: A case study for Crete Island, Greece’,Journal of Hydrology, 479 146-58 (2013).10. A. G. Koutroulis, A. E. K. Vrohidou, andI. K. Tsanis, ‘Spatiotemporalcharacteristics of meteorological drought for the Island of Crete’, Journal ofHydrometeorology, 12 [2] 206-26 (2011).11. M. Kritsotakis and I. Tsanis, ‘An integrated approach for sustainable waterresources management of Messara basin, Crete, Greece’, European Water, 27/2815-30 (2009).12. E. Bergmeier and S. Abrahamczyk, ‘Current and historical diversity and newrecords of wetland plants in Crete, Greece’, Willdenowia, 38 433-53 (2008).13. L. Demetropoulou, N. Nikolaidis, V. Papadoulakis, K. Tsakiris, T. Koussouris,N. Kalogerakis, K. Koukaras, A. Chatzinikolaou, and K. Theodoropoulos, ‘Waterframework directive implementation in Greece: Introducing participation inwater governance - the Case of the Evrotas River Basin management plan’,Environmental Policy and Governance, 20[5] 336-49 (2010).VIII.International Cooperation onWater Sciences and ResearchUnderstanding the Global Water System for Water Cooperation1. Global Water System Project. (2011): Water security for a planet under pressure:Transition to sustainability: Interconnected challenges and solutions. London:Planet Under Pressure.[ 333 ]
Notes and References2. Alcamo, J (2008): ‘Managing the Global Water System’. In: Simon, L., et al.(Eds). 2008. Princeton Guide to Ecology. Princeton University Press.3. C.J. Vorosmarty, P.B. McIntyre, M.O. Gessner, D. Dudgeon, A. Prusevich, P.Green, S. Glidden, S.E. Bunn, C.A. Sullivan, C. Reidy Liermann, and P.M. Davies(2010): Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467,555-561.4. Claudia W. Sadoff and David Grey (2005): ‘Cooperation on International Rivers’,Water International, 30:4, 420-427.5. Pahl-Wostl, C. 2006. ‘The importance of social learning in restoring themultifunctionality of rivers and floodplains’. Ecology and Society 11(1): 10.6. Bhaduri, A. and Liebe, J. (2013). ‘Cooperation in Transboundary Water Sharingwith Issue Linkage: Game-Theoretical Case Study in the Volta Basin’. J. WaterResour. Plann. Manage., 139(3), 235–245.A use-inspired approach to sustainable water management: USM’s experiences ofcooperation through research and capacity-buildingAcknowledgement:The authors are very grateful to Ahmad Firdaus Ahmad Shabudin and Norshah RizalAli for the assistance with researched information and photographs; ChristopherSmith for editing the initial draft; USM for becoming a partner of the UNESCO-TudorRose ‘Free Flow Project’ and all others who have assisted in the preparation of thispaper, directly or indirectly, but remain anonymous.1. Ghani, A., Zakaria, A., Abdullah, R., Ahamad, M., Intl. J. River Basin ManagementVol. 3, No. 3 (2005), p. 143-144 © 2005 IAHR & INBO).2. Wan Omar, W., (Editor, 2002). Polar@USM: Profile of polar research atUniversiti Sains Malaysia, Published jointly by Malaysian Antarctic ResearchProgramme, Akademi Sains Malaysia and Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11100 PulauPinang, Malaysia.3. United Nations, (2012). The future we want, A/CONF.216/L.1, United NationsConference on Sustainable Development outcome document, 20-22 June 2012,Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. ‘Water and Sanitation’ section, paragraph 120.4. United Nations, (2013). Budapest Water summit, http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade.5. Kiat, C., (Editor, 2011). REDAC Profile, 10th anniversary 2001-2011,Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Cataloguing-in-Publication Data, ISBN 978-983-3067-36-7.6. Weng, C., (2005). ‘Sustainable management of rivers in Malaysia: Involving allstakeholders’, Intl. J. River Basin Management Vol. 3, No. 3 (2005), pp. 147–162© 2005 IAHR & INBO.Referred to in Ghani, A. et al (2005) op cit.7. http://www.water.gov.my8. Ghani, A., Zakaria, A., Abdullah, R., Yusof, F., Sidek, L., Kassim & Ainan.,(2004). BIO-Ecological Drainage System (BIOECODS): Concept, Design andConstruction, the 6th International Conference on Hydroscience and Engineering(ICHE-2004), May 30th -June 3rd, Brisbane, Australia.9. Nor, N., Gapor, S., Jegatesen, G., and Khelghat-Doost, H., (2012). ‘A SustainableStrategy for Gauging Rural Vulnerability and Promoting Sustainable Rural andUrban Lifestyles’, Sustainable Development at Universities: New Horizons, Chapter52, Edited by Walter Leal Filho, Series: Environmental Education, Communicationand Sustainability, Peter Lang Scientific Publishers: Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern,Brussels, New York, Oxford, Vienna, 2012. ISBN 978-3-631-62560-6.10. Zakaria, N., Ghani, A., Abdullah, R., Yusof, F., Sidek, L., Kassim & Ainan.,(2004). BIO-Ecological Drainage System (BIOECODS): Concept, Design andConstruction, the 6th International Conference on Hydroscience and Engineering(ICHE-2004), May 30th -June 3rd, Brisbane, Australia.11. Kiat, C., (Editor, 2011) op cit.12. Kiat, C., (Editor, 2011) ibid.Teo, Y., Falconer, A, and Lin, B., (2009). ‘Modelling effects of mangroveson tsunamis’. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, WaterManagement. Thomas Telford, London, 2009, 162, No. 1, 5–14, doi: 10.1680/wama.2009.162.1.5.13. Koh, H., (2011). Su Yean Teh, Koh Hock Lye, and Yi Ting Moh, TsunamiSimulations for Impact Assessment, Modelling scenarios of tsunami in southChina sea; Ed Koh Hock Lye et al, Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, ISBN 978-983-861-498-6.14. Polar@USM - http://polar.usm.my/index.php/en.15. Koshy, K., (2002). The Antarctic Treaty Summit 2009: P13-15, Profile of polarresearch at Universiti Sains Malaysia, Published jointly by Malaysian AntarcticResearch Programme, Akademi Sains Malaysia and Universiti Sains Malaysia,11100 Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.16. Koshy, K., Corcoran, P., Hezri, A., Hollingsdhead, B., Weakland, J., and Hamid,Z., (2012). The Ethical Dimensions of Sustainability in Higher Education –Applying the Principles of Earth Charter in Malaysia & Beyond; PerpustakanNegara Malaysia, ISBN 978-967-394-040-0.17. Sharp, T., (2013). Personal communication; Strategic Policy Advisor, Hawke’s BayRegional Council, 159 Dalton Street, Napier 4142, New Zealand.Further reading:- Hollingshead, B., Corcoran, P., Koshy, K., Hezri, H., Weakland, J., and Hamid, Z.(2012). The Ethical Dimension of Sustainability in Higher Education: Applying thePrinciples of the Earth Charter in Malaysia and Beyond; Sustainable Developmentat Universities: New Horizons, Chapter 45, Edited by Walter Leal Filho, Series:Environmental Education, Communication and Sustainability, Peter Lang ScientificPublishers: Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, Brussels, New York, Oxford, Vienna,2012. ISBN 978-3-631-62560-6.KEI: international water-related research for sustainable development1. Mun, Y., et al. (2008). Integrated Water Management Model on the Selenge RiverBasin: Status Survey and Investigation (Phase 1). Korea Environment Institute.2. Chu, J., et al. (2009). Integrated Water Management Model on the SelengeRiver Basin: Basin Assessment and Integrated Analysis (Phase 2). KoreaEnvironment Institute.3. Chu, J., et al. (2010). Integrated Water Management Model on the Selenge RiverBasin: Development and Evaluation of the IWMM on the SRB (Phase 3). KoreaEnvironment Institute.4. Ro, T., et al. (2008). Joint Research between Korea and Russia on Networking forFreshwater Biomonitoring and Ecosystem Health Assessment in Northeast Asia.Korea Environment Institute.5. Lee, Y., et al. (2011). Ethiopian Water Resource Development-Sediment &Reservoir Control. Korea Environment Institute.Lee, Y., et al. (2012). Ethiopian Water Resource Development: Analysis ofExternal Effect of Climate Change & Downstream Areas. Korea EnvironmentInstitute.6. Ro, T. et al. (2012). Development of Green-Growth Strategies of DevelopingCountries in East Asia. Korea Environment Institute.Ecohydrology – transdisciplinary sustainability science for multicultural cooperationAuthor details:- Professor Macej Zalewski, European Regional Centre for Ecohydrology of thePolish Academy of Sciences, and University of Lodz, Department of AppliedEcology, Poland.- PhD Katarzyna Izydorczyk, European Regional Centre for Ecohydrology of thePolish Academy of Sciences.- PhD Iwona Wagner, European Regional Centre for Ecohydrology of the PolishAcademy of Sciences, and University of Lodz, Department of Applied Ecology,Poland.- Associate Professor Joanna Mankiewicz-Boczek, European Regional Centrefor Ecohydrology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, and University of Lodz,Department of Applied Ecology, Poland.- PhD Magdalena Urbaniak, European Regional Centre for Ecohydrology of thePolish Academy of Sciences, and University of Lodz, Department of AppliedEcology, Poland.- MSc Wojciech Frtczak, European Regional Centre for Ecohydrology of thePolish Academy of Sciences, and Regional Water Management Authority,Warsaw, Poland.Acknowledgements:The research and implementation has been conducted within the EU Project SWITCH(IP 6 PR UE, GOCE 018530 2006-2011), further supported by the Grant of the Cityof Lodz Mayor (Ed.VII.4346/G-19/2009 z 12.08.2009), continued now by the EUprojects: EH-REK (LIFE08 ENV/PL/000517) and POIG.01.01.02-10-106/09-04,‘Innovative recourses and effective methods of safety improvement and durability ofbuildings and transport infrastructure in the sustainable development’, financed bythe EU from the European Fund of Regional Development based on the OperationalProgram of the Innovative Economy.‘Innovative resources and effective methods of safety improvement and durability ofbuildings and transport infrastructure in the sustainable development’ is financed bythe European Union from the European Fund of Regional Development based onthe Operational Program of the Innovative Economy, POIG.01.01.02-10-106/09.LIFE08 ENV/PL/000517 EH-REK Ecohydrological rehabilitation of recreationalvessels ‘Arturówek’ (Lodz) as a model approach to urban reclamation tanks.LIFE+EKOROB project: Ecotones for reduction of diffuse pollutions (LIFE08 ENV/PL/000519) , Nr N R14 0061 06.1. Burdyuzha, V. 2006. The Future of Life and Future of our Civilization. Springer.Universitat Frankfurt am Main.2. Zalewski, M., Janauer, G. A., Jolankai G. 1997. ‘Ecohydrology: a new paradigmfor the sustainable use of aquatic resources’. In Conceptual Background, WorkingHypothesis, Rationale and Scientific Guidelines for the Implementation of theIHP-V Projects 2.3/2.4. UNESCO, Paris, Technical Documents in Hydrology No.7. Paris: UNESCO.Zalewski, M., Wagner-Lotkowska I., Tarczynska M. 2000. ‘Ecohydrologicalapproaches to the elimination of toxic algal blooms in a lowland reservoir’. Verh.Internat. Verein. Limnol. 27, 3176-3183.Zalewski, M. 2011. Book Review of Hydroecology and Ecohydrology: Past, Present[ 334 ]
Notes and Referencesand Future. (edited by Wood P.J, Hannah D. M. & Sadler J. P., 2008, John Wiley& Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK). In: Vad Zon. J. 9, 1-5.3. The extended version of this manuscript will appear in the Ecohydrology &Hydrobiology Journal 2013:2.4. Zalewski, M. 2002, ‘Ecohydrology – the use of ecological and hydrologicalprocesses for sustainable management of water resources’. Hydrol. Sci. J. 47 (5),s. 825–834.5. Zalewski, M. 2006. ‘Ecohydrology – an interdisciplinary tool for integratedprotection and management of water bodies’. Archiv für Hydrobiologie ,Supplement 158: 613-622.Zalewski, M. 2011 op cit.6. Porporato, A., D’Odorico, P., Laio, F., Ridolfi, L., Rodriguez-Iturbe I. 2002.‘Ecohydrology of water-controlled ecosystems’. Adv. in Wat. Res. vol 25 no. 8-12,pp. 1335 – 1348.Loik, M., Breshears, D.D., Lauenroth, W., Belnap, J. 2004. ‘Multi-scaleperspective of water pulses in dryland ecosystems: climatology and ecohydrologyof the western USA’. Oecol. 141, 269–281, 10.1007/s00442-004-1570-y.7. Mitsch, W.J.,1993. ‘Ecological engineering – a cooperative role with the planetarylife support’. Environ. Sci. Technol. 27, 438-445.Mitsch, W.J.,2012. ‘What is ecological engineering?’. Ecol. Eng. 45(2012), 5-12.Bednarek, A., Stolarska, M., Ubraniak, M., Zalewski M. 2010. ‘Application ofpermeable reactive barrier for reduction of nitrogen load in the agricultural areas –preliminary results’. Ecohyd. & Hydrobiol. 10, no. 2-4: 355-362.8. Odum , H. T., 1983. System Ecology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York(reprinted in 1994 by University Press of Colorado, Niwot, CO).9. Gunderson, L.H, Holling C.S., 2001. Panarchy: Understanding Transformationsin Systems of Humans and Nature. Island Press, Washington on DC.10. Zalewski 2013 ‘Ecohydrology process-oriented thinking, towards sustainable riverbasins’. Ecohydrol. & Biohydrol. Article in press.11. Mankiewicz-Boczek J. 2012. ‘Diagnosing and possibilities of limiting toxiccyanobacterial blooms’. In: Zalewski M. and Urbaniak M. [Eds.] Adaptation ofecohydrological system solutions and biotechnologies for Africa. IIPAS – ERCEu/a UNESCO, Lodz, pp. 75-90.12. Tarczyska M., Zalewski M. 1994. ‘Toxicity of cyanobacterial blooms in eutrophicreservoirs. Toksyczno zakwitów sinicowych w eutroficznych zbiornikach’. In:Zalewski M. [Ed.] Zintegrowana Strategia Ochrony i Zagospodarowania EkosystemówWodnych. [In Polish]. Biblioteka Monitoringu rodowiska Łód, pp. 79-89.Tarczyska, M., Romanowska-Duda, Z., Jurczak, T., Zalewski, M., 2001. ‘Toxiccyanobacterial blooms in a drinking water reservoir - causes, consequences andmanagement strategy’. Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 1 (2), 237–246.Jurczak, T., Tarczyska, M., Izydorczyk, K., Mankiewicz, J., Zalewski, M.,Meriluoto, J., 2005. ‘Elimination of microcystins by water treatment processes —examples from Sulejow Reservoir’, Poland. Water Res. 39 (11), 2394–2406.Mankiewicz-Boczek, J., Izydorczyk, K., Romanowska-Duda, Z., Jurczak, T.,Stefaniak, K., Kokociski, M., 2006a. ‘Detection and monitoring toxigenicity ofcyanobacteria by application of molecular methods’. Environ. Toxicol. 21 (4),380–387.Mankiewicz-Boczek, J., Urbaniak, M., Romanowska-Duda, Z., Izydorczyk, K.,2006b. ‘Toxic Cyanobacteria strains in lowland dam reservoir (Sulejow Res.,Central Poland): Amplification of mcy genes for detection and identification’. Pol.J. Ecol. 54 (2), 171–180. 23.Izydorczyk, K., Jurczak, T., Wojtal-Frankiewicz, A., Skowron, A., Mankiewicz-Boczek, J., Tarczyska, M., 2008. ‘Influence of abiotic and biotic factors onmicrocystin content in Microcystis aeruginosa cells in a eutrophic temperatereservoir’. J. Plankton Res. 30 (4), 393–400.13. Jurczak, T., 2006. Use of cyanobacterial toxins monitoring in order to optimizewater treatment and remediation strategies of dam reservoirs. Zastosowaniemonitoringu toksyn sinicowych w celu optymalizacji technologii uzdatnianiawody oraz strategii rekultywacji zbiorników zaporowych. [In Polish]. Ph.D.dissertation, University of Lodz.14. Mankiewicz-Boczek et al., 2006 a; 2006b op cit.Ggała I., Izydorczyk K., Skowron A., Kamecka-Plaskota D., StefaniakK., Kokociski M., Mankiewicz-Boczek J. 2010. ‘Appearance of toxigeniccyanobacteria in two Polish lakes dominated by Microcystis aeruginosa andPlanktothrix agardhii and environmental factors influence’. Ecohydrology &Hydrobiology 10 (1): 25-34.Ggała I., Izydorczyk K., Jurczak T., Pawełczyk J., Dziadek J., Wojtal-FrankiewiczA., Jówik A., Mankiewicz-Boczek J. 2013. ‘Role of Environmental Factors andToxic Genotypes in The Regulation of Microcystins-Producing CyanobacterialBlooms’. Microbial. Ecol. – initially accepted.15. Tarczyska and Zalewski, 1994 op cit.Zalewski et al., 2000 op cit.Izydorczyk et al., 2008 op cit.Wagner, I., Zalewski, M. 2009. ‘Ecohydrology as a Basis for the Sustainable CityStrategic Planning Focus on Lodz, Poland’. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol. 8: 209-217. DOI 10.1007/s11157-009-9169-8.Ggała et al., 2013 op cit.16. LIFE08 ENV/PL/000519, www.ekorob.pl.17. Zalewski, 2006; 2011 op cit.EcoSummit., Columbus Declaration., http://www.ecosummit2012.org.18. Zalewski, M., Wagner I. 2005. ‘Ecohydrology – the use of water and ecosystemprocesses for healthy urban environments’. In: Special issue: Aquatic Habitatsin Integrated Urban Water Management. Ecohydrol. & Hydrobiol., Vol. 5, No4, 263-268.Novotny, V., 2010. ‘Footprints tools for cities of the future:moving towardssustainable urban use’. Water 21, 14-16.ICLEI, 2012, Resilient Cities 2012: Congress Report, ICLEI, Bonn, Germany, pp, 24.19. Kuprys-Lipinska,I, Elgalal,A, Kuna P. 2009. ‘Urban-rural differences in theprevalence of atopic diseases in the general population in Lodz Province (Poland)’.Post Dermatol Alergol 2009; XXVI, 5: 249–256.20. Wagner I., Pascal, B., 2013. ‘Ecohydrology for the City of the Future’. Ecohydrol.& Biotechnol. Article in Press.Zalewski, M., Wagner I. 2005 op cit.21. Zalewski, M., Wagner, I. 2012. ‘Blue-Green City for compensating Global ClimateChange’. The Parliam. Mag. Issue 350.22. Wagner, I., Zalewski, M. 2009 op cit.23. Zalewski et al., 2012 op cit.24. Wagner, I., da Silva Wells, C., Butterworth, J., Dzigielewska-Geitz, M., 2010.Reflection on the achievements and lessons from the SWITCH urban watermanagement initiative in Łód, Poland. SWITCH city assessment paper., In:http://www.irc.nl/page/61360.Wagner, I., da Silva Wells, C., Butterworth, J., Dzigielewska-Geitz, M., 2011.Łód:city of water. In: Butterworth, J., McIntyre, P., da Silva Wells, C., (Eds.) SWITCHin the City. Putting Urban Water Management to the Test, IRC International waterand Sanitation Centre. The Hague, The Netherlands, pp.210-221.25. Zalewski 2000 op cit.Zalewski 2002 op cit.Zalewski, M., Santiago-Fandino, V., Neate, J. 2003. ‘Energy, water, plantinteractions: “Green feedback” as a mechanism for environmental managementand control through the application of phytotechnology and Ecohydrology’.Hydrol. Proc. 17(14), 2753-2767.Sharing water observations: turning local data into global informationAuthor details:- Dr Harry Dixon, Senior Hydrologist, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, NaturalEnvironment Research Council (NERC), UK.- Professor John Rodda, Fellow, NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, UK.- Professor Alan Jenkins, Deputy Director, NERC Centre for Ecology andHydrology, UK.- Professor Siegfried Demuth, Chief of Section, Hydrological Systems and ClimateChange, UNESCO.- Ulrich Looser, Head, Global Runoff Data Centre, Federal Institute of Hydrology,Germany.1. Hannah, D. M., Demuth S., Van Lanen, H. A. J., Looser, U., Prudhomme, C.,Rees, R., Stahl, K. and Tallaksen, L. M. (2010) ‘Large-scale river flow archives:importance, current status and future needs’. Hydrol. Processes, 25, 1191–1200.2. Dixon, H., Hannaford, J. and Fry, M. J. (2013). ‘The effective management ofnational hydrometric data – experiences from the United Kingdom’, HydrologicalSciences Journal, DOI:10.1080/02626667.2013.787486.3. Huang, Y. and Demuth. S. (Eds.) (2010) FRIEND: A Global Perspective 2006-2010, UNESCO International Hydrological Programme, German IHP/HWRPSecretariat, Koblenz, Germany, 147 pp.The Eco-Smart Waterworks System1. United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment & Health (UNU-INWEH), Water Security & the Global Water Agenda, A UN-water analyticalbrief, pp. 12 (2013).2. Soo Hong Noh, Eco-Smart Waterworks System for Climate change, The 8thConference of Aseanian Membrane Society, Xi’an, China, (2013).[ 335 ]
Change language