Water as a driver for international cooperation and trust building. A seminar on (international) water conflicts
December 4th 2014 Peace Palace in The Hague
Commissioned by
2 / 37
Water as a driver for international cooperation and trust building. A seminar on (international) water conflicts. Introduction On December 4th 2014 the relatively new Water Diplomacy Consortium1 hosted a seminar on international water conflicts at the Peace Palace in The Hague. The seminar that was commissioned by the municipality of The Hague, was a follow up event of the international conference on Water Security and Peace2 that was held a little over a year ago. Around 50 participants (see annex) from several countries and with multiple professions gathered in the Peace Palace to participate in this seminar and networking event. The goal of the seminar was to learn more about the mechanisms and processes that drive water conflicts, and which skills and ethics are required to turn water conflicts into mutual cooperation. However, more importantly, the event provided ample opportunity to get acquainted with water (diplomacy) professionals. It turned out to be an interesting and wholesome afternoon; concluding that water can be a driver for trust, cooperation, peace and security in (international) water basins.
______________ 1
The Hague Institute of Global Justice, Clingendael, UPEACE The Hague, Water Governance Centre, and UNESCO-IHE (Delft).
2
See http://www.waterdiplomacyconsortium.org/2014/05/conference-proceedingswater-security-and-peace-conference-2013 for more infomation and download proceedings
3 / 37
The Seminar Welcome and Introduction (Henk van Schaik, UPEACE Centre The Hague) At the onset of the seminar, Henk van Schaik (UPEACE Centre The Hague) welcomed the participants to the seminar and explained the increasing interest – globally- in better understanding and resolving water conflicts. Quoting Jerry Delli Prescoli, Aaron Wolf, and Kofi Annan, Henk van Schaik pointed out that cooperation – not war – is more likely to occur in many areas in the world where water disputes arise or are already present.
Consequently, you can ask yourself the question: do we really need to find new ways to resolve water conflicts if conflicting parties managed to find ways to cooperate in the past? Unsurprisingly, complex problems require complex solutions. In fact, if we take into consideration the effects of climate change and population growth, conflicts will be on ancillary social-economic issues, such as: energy and food production, industrial development, sanitation, etc. Hence, this growing complexity demands better ways to insulate water related conflicts to spiral out of control. In other words, there is a need for water diplomacy. How does that work?
The role of water diplomacy in preventing water conflicts (Mariska Heijs, Clingendael) To explain what water diplomacy is and what its role is in preventing water conflicts, Mariska Heijs (Clingendael Institute for International Relations) was given the floor to provide an overview on the matter. Ms. Heijs started out by defining water diplomacy as ‘[a]ll contact between (non-)state actors and at least one state or international governmental organisation over transboundary freshwater resources such as a lake, river and aquifer basins’.
4 / 37
Stressing that there is an increasing competition over freshwater resources in the future, she also pointed out that cooperation is more likely than conflict in many of the so-called ‘basins at risk’. Nonetheless, just the fact that riparian states and the people inside them are cooperating, does not explain the quality of the cooperation. Hence, Ms. Heijs pointed out that there are several diplomatic instruments that can be utilized by riparian states to improve cooperation, for example: mediation, scientific cooperation, regional integration, negotiation, fact-finding, etc. If - for some reason – riparian states do run into trouble and seek to ascertain western water diplomats to solve their conflict, several conflict prevention instruments could be used to resolve immediate conflict. This often takes form of track I and II diplomacy, which means as much as having a state-level channel and an informal non-governmental (NGO) one. These channels are then utilized to e.g. mediate the conflict and fact-finding missions. Finally, Ms. Heijs concluded that – in order to be an effective water diplomat – several diplomatic qualities have to be present, such as: neutrality and legitimacy. Only then can water diplomacy generate mutual understanding, support the negotiation process, and support peace and stability.
Mediation in the Israeli/Palestinian water conflict (Patrick Huntjens, The Hague Institute for Global Justice) Then, how does water diplomacy work in a real-life situation? Patrick Huntjens’ (The Hague Institute for Global Justice) presentation on how water is part of the Isreali- Palestinian peace process, and what steps have been taken that make water a possible carrier for peace, proved to be insightful. First of all, Mr. Huntjens showed that water related conflicts and the need to resolve them (or preferably prevent them) has found its way into the political agendas worldwide. More and more reports are being published that show water and food shortages are two important nails on the coffin of (violent) international and domestic conflict, and hence the necessity for water diplomacy becomes more apparent; also for politicians. However, water conflicts rarely take place in isolation and are often part of an already complex (violent) conflict. This is also the case in the IsrealiPalestinian conflict. There, water is ‘only’ one of five main topics in the Middle East peace process. However, what if water could become the carrier of peace, trust, and cooperation? Mr. Huntjens is optimistic and shows which steps have been taken to reach a negotiated agreement. Assigned by the Geneva Initiative (or Geneva Accord 2003), the The Hague Institute for Global Justice was asked to update the accords’ annex on Water. In what was essentially a large mediation process, four major steps were taken to reach a track II agreement in November 2014. The first step involved a stakeholder assessment in which several interviews were conducted to establish insights in potential areas of conflict and of common interests. Secondly, there has to be an equal understanding of the factual information, and hence joint fact-finding missions were conducted to minimize the risk of politicised discussions. Understanding the common interest and sharing the same information, the third step they took was on facilitating multi-party
5 / 37
problem-solving. Here, the different stakeholders are encouraged to explore more ways to meet the most important interests on all sides simultaneously; hence, creating more value and generate a broader vision on sharing benefits. Mr. Huntjens describes this as increasing the pie by utilizing a multifunctional usage approach. Lastly, the areas of agreement (e.g. principles, definitions, the need for cross-border wastewater management, etc.) are assembled and agreed upon.
Mr. Huntjens concludes that successful cooperation over shared water resources in the Israeli- Palestine conflict has the potential to build mutual trust and understanding amongst the conflicting parties on other areas as well.
Water diplomacy research and education at UNESCO-IHE, with Central Asia as a case example (Joop de Schutter, UNESCO-IHE) Still, achieving an agreement and having sound cooperation remains complex and uncertain. There is a large variety of water conflicts and where they take place. Sometimes the sheer size of the area it entails is astonishing, and sometimes the region, its culture, its politics and history play a large part in the water conflict itself. The case study on Central Asia and its Aral Sea deltas (Amudarya and Syrdarya) by Joop de Schutter (UNESCO-IHE) showed that these aspects are in fact present in conflicts over water resources. The Aral Sea basin is incredibly large and is one of the largest in the world, and runs from the Aral Sea in Kazakhstan to Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan and Turkmenistan. Although the Aral Sea is vulnerable to climate change, Mr. De Schutter showed that it is mainly large infrastructural development – or water use policies if you wish - that aggravate the water conflict. Mr. De Schutter started out by explaining the history of the basin, starting with the area that was controlled by the Russian Tsarist government in the nineteenth century and the Sovjet Union after that. In the early 1920s and inspired by the achievements of the British
6 / 37
empire, the Sovjet Union started constructing large irrigation schemes to produce cotton and agricultural products. For the entire Aral Sea basin, agricultural production and the need for irrigation was, and still is, essential to their existence. Over time, modernization plans to improve agricultural output led to the construction of multiple function dams (also for hydropower) in the 1950s. Then, by the time the Sovjet Union collapsed, much of the infrastructure was under-maintained, and all the ‘newly’ independent countries had to create a new multi-stakeholder reality in the basin. Today, large demographic changes and demand for energy and prosperity fuel conflicts between upstream and downstream adversaries. Mr. De Schutter showed that new stakeholders (e.g. Russia and China) are becoming part of the water conflict by engaging into hydro-energy plans with selected upstream riparian states in the Aral Sea basin. It is uncertain whether the regional water organisations present in the region are able to effectively address these looming conflicts. In order to do so, Mr. De Shutter argues that transparency and using sound data, indicators, and better models could help facilitate the decision-making processes. Mr. De Schutter ends by saying that the secret is in balancing national and regional interests per sector in an atmosphere of transparency and cooperation. The previous presentations all demonstrate that it is important that you know both technically and institutionally what you talk about, that there has to be some sort of organisation, and lastly, that people get to know each other and cooperate.
The importance of good water governance (Maarten Hofstra, Water Governance Centre) The last speaker of the seminar, Maarten Hofstra (Water Governance Centre), has put these aspects into a three-layer-model of water governance and illustrated it by focussing on water governance issues in Europe and The Netherlands. The model consists of a content layer (policy, information, knowledge), a policy layer (organisation, legislation, finance) and a relational layer (culture, ethics, cooperation, participation), and is being used to make clear what relevant elements of water governance can be distinguished and how they are interrelated. Mr. Hofstra illustrated the model by focussing on large infrastructural developments and cooperation with riparian states of the river basins The Netherlands are part of. He showed how Dutch water authorities (water boards) are having ‘kitchen table’ talks with people that are affected by infrastructural development, and that it is important to keep everybody you cooperate with on board. Although content en policy are important, cooperation and sound water governance is only going to be successful when ample time is taken to invest in relations.
7 / 37
Discussion During the seminar participants were invited to ask questions and actively contribute to the seminar. Although water crises will remain to exist in the near future, a question was raised whether or not we should focus on preventing water conflicts instead of considering them imminent. This would be an ideal situation and worthwhile exploring more. Still, the quest for the right variables that influence this type of conflict is complex and has been at the center of a large part of the epistemic community for decades. Other participants argued that technological development (e.g. Desalination plants) could alleviate water conflicts in the future. This ‘techno-fix’ argument is intriguing, however, other participants pointed out that – in case of the desalination plants- it requires a massive amount of energy and investments to be successful. Questions and discussions worthwhile continuing.
Concluding remarks Water governance and water diplomacy are important to the water conflict areas of the world because it can be a driver for peace and security to millions of people. If we manage to invest in relations and are able to generate trust, water governance looks promising and has a lot of untapped potential. The participants actively interacted with questions to the speakers about the role of water diplomacy, and also several participants explained their own work experience in the field of Water Diplomacy. Thus the meeting ended for the participants with insights and new contacts. The participation of Marian Patrick, who works on Water Diplomacy in the Swedish International Water Institute, was particularly useful for the increasing contacts of the WDC with SIWI. For further information on the activities of the Water Diplomacy Consortium please visit the WDC website: http://www.waterdiplomacyconsortium.org.
8 / 37
Programme 16.00
Reception and coffee and tea
16.30
Welcome and Introduction (Henk van Schaik, UPEACE Centre The Hague
16.40
“The role of water diplomacy in preventing water conflicts” by Mariska Heijs (Clingendael)
17.00
“Mediation in the Israeli/Palestinian water conflict” by Patrick Huntjens (The Hague Institute for Global Justice)
17.20
“Water diplomacy research and education at UNESCO-IHE, with Central Asia as a case example” by Joop de Schutter (UNESCO-IHE)
17.40
“The importance of good water governance” by Maarten Hofstra (Water Governance Centre)
18.00
Discussion
18.15
Drinks and bites
9 / 37
List of participants Name Myriam van Dorp Rianne van Dorp Marius Enthoven Maarten Gehem Gerard Giebels Ali al Hadaui Petra van der Ham Eveline Hartogs Mariska Heijs Nina Hemmings Alexander Heyendael Anne-Marie Hitipeuw Maarten Hofsta Agnès Hugues Nikki van Hulten Patrick Huntjens Estafania Ibuado Desirée Immerzeel Mansi Jasuja Jennie Jouvenaar Ntumba Kapinga Bente Klein Panagiotis Kontogiannis Marthe van Laarhoven Paul Langeveld Jasper Luiten Rens de Man Stefanie Placencia Medina Stan Mencke Corné Nijburg Johanna Ospina Marian Patrick Myrinne Rietveld Henk van Schaik Louise van Schaik Joop de Schutter Juan Serrano Zaki Shubber Erik Siepman Julia Soldatiuk Artur Usanov Maya Velis Maria Weigt-Bienzle Rens Willems Winny van Willigen Pieter van der Zaag
Organization Wageningen University UPEACE Centre The Hague The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies (HCSS) Koek en Ei Mediation - MfN Rechtbankmediator en Trainer UPEACE Centre The Hague UPEACE Centre The Hague Clingendael Institute Trust Fund for Victims – International Criminal Court Municipality of The Hague Water Governance Centre / UNESCO-IHE International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Municipality of The Hague The Hague Institute for Global Justice (THIGJ) University of Leiden Oxfam Novib Mansi Jasuja Consulting - Environmental | Climate Resilience Advisory Services Municipality of The Hague Peace and Collaborative Development Network Leiden University College The Hague United Network of Young Peacebuilders (UNOY Peacebuilders) Clingendael Institute NWB-fund / Dutch Water Authorities (DWA) / Water Governance Centre (WGC) Dutch Water Authorities / WGC The Hague Institute for Global Justice (THIGJ) HUMANITY House Leiden University College The Hague Water Governance Centre UPEACE Centre The Hague SIWI UPEACE Centre The Hague Clingendael Institute UNESCO-IHE Contenemos UNESCO-IHE ARCADIS The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies (HCSS) University Utrecht UPEACE Centre The Hague Municipality of The Hague UNESCO-IHE
10 / 37
Presentations Mariska Heijs (Clingendael)
The role of water diplomacy in preventing water conflicts
Mariska Heijs, Clingendael 4 December 2014
A definition Definition water diplomacy: All contacts between(non-)state actors and at least one state or international governmental organisation over transboundary freshwater resources such as a lake, river and aquifer basins (Rood/Van Genderen)
River basins
Basins at risk
11 / 37
Cooperation or Conflict? • Users of water: impact • Geographical location: upstream or downstream • Power distribution: (a)symmetry, (un)friendly relations, uni- or bilateral actions • Size of the country, GDP, population, resources
Conflict or Cooperation? • Availability of sound scientific data • Treaties, joint institutions, RBC • Negotiations: scientific framework, side payments, issue-linkage
Instruments – riparian states •
Diplomatic instruments for riparian states: – negotiation – good offices – impartial fact-finding – mediation – conciliation – arbitration – adjudication – trust building – scientific cooperation – economic cooperation – international treaty – joint institution – regional integration
Instruments – third parties • Diplomatic instruments for a third party track I and II (states and ngos): Conflict prevention: promoting advancement of international water law development and technical assistance capacity-building trainings Conflict resolution: good offices mediation fact-finding conciliation
12 / 37
International Water Law UNWC: The UN Convention on the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses (UNWC): • Entered into force in August 2014 • Contains principle of equitable and reasonable utilisation • Other principles: obligation not to cause significant harm; procedural duties; duty to cooperate UNECE: Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe UNECE) • In force since 1996 • Requires parties to prevent, control and reduce transboundary impact, use TB waters reasonably and equitable and ensure their sustained management
What makes a good water diplomat? Most important qualities needed, based on research: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Neutrality Legitimacy Status from a proven record Interpersonal proficiency and skills (empathy) 5. Knowledge: technical expertise, internat. Water law/treaties 6. Financial leverage and power 7. Capacity to guide negotiations
Water Diplomacy • Supports negotiation processes • Creates mutual understanding • Supports equitable and reasonable utilization of water • Supports peace and stability • Promotes cooperation • Roles to play for riparians and third parties such as states, ngos, ios
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!
13 / 37
Patrick Huntjens (The Hague Institute for Global Justice)
Water as a permanent status issue in the Israeli Palestinian negotiations Dr. Patrick Huntjens Head of Water Diplomacy The Hague Institue for Global Justice 4 December 2014
© Copy-right: P. Huntjens, 2014
Content
• Our approach to water diplomacy • The Israeli-Palestinian water conflict • Working towards a negotiated agreement
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Water and food insecurity at the Roots of Conflict in Syria • Several reports show that the conflict in Syria is partly caused by long-term drought. From 2006 to 2011, 60% of Syria had to deal with the worst prolonged drought and the heaviest crop failures for thousands of years. • Because of this drought many Syrians faced extreme "food insecurity". According to a UN report in 2011 this caused 2 to 3 million people to live in extreme poverty • It not coincidental that the epicenter of early stages of the protests of the opposition movement against Assad (March 2011) started in the agricultural city Dara'a - a place that was hit hard by five years of drought and water scarcity, and that barely received help from the al-Assad regime.
3 September 2014
Dr. Patrick Huntjens & Katharina Nachbar | GloCo Authors’ Workshop
14 / 37
Water as a source of conflict • Water is an essential resource for: > life and good health > agricultural production, energy production and ecosystems > sustainable economic development and poverty reduction
• According to the UN, one in three of the world's population currently lives in water stressed areas and that's set to increase to one in two by 2030 • The situation is getting worse as needs for water rise along with population growth, urbanization and increased domestic and industrial use
• Water scarcity: when the demand for water is greater than the availability • Water stress occurs when the demand for water exceeds the available amount during a certain period or when poor quality restricts its use
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Water Conflict Map
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Water conflict: a key challenge for the 21st Century A water conflict is a conflict between countries or groups over access to water; most conflicts revolve around access to fresh water Both the EU Council and the Intelligence Community of the United States, noted that in the coming 10 years tensions and conflicts over access to water are likely to become more frequent and could endanger international peace and security
Water problems will constrain the production of food and energy, and therefore pose a risk to global food markets and economic growth
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
15 / 37
Towards more effective water diplomacy • Effective Water Diplomacy: a critical tool to ensure that shared water resources are managed efficiently, sustainably and equitably • Key challenges: complexity and uncertainty • Water diplomacy requires an approach that diagnoses water problems, identifies intervention points, and proposes sustainable solutions that are sensitive to diverse viewpoints and values, ambiguity and uncertainty as well as changing and competing needs. • A Mutual Gains Approach instead of Zero-Sum Game • Sharing waters should be approached from a perspective of shared opportunities that can exceed the optimum national benefits. • The aim of water diplomacy should therefore be to identify and strengthen such mutual benefits. • Water diplomacy can be successful when the parties that have conflicting interests recognize that non-collaboration is likely to result in a worse outcome for all.
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
The Israeli-Palestinian Water Conflict • Water is one of the five main topics in the Middle East Peace Process • Access to sufficient and clean water is a major societal problem with severe negative impacts on human health, food production and economic development, and for peace and stability in the region • Large inequality between Palestinians and Israelis in access to water: resp. 70 litres a day per person and 300 litres per person • The water balance of Israel and Palestine consists of shared water bodies and interconnected systems, and a strict division of water between the two parties is therefore virtually impossible
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Mediation in the Israeli-Palestinian Water Conflict • Assigned by the Geneva Initiative to update the Water Annex • Water Annex is part of the Geneva Accord (2003), a draft Peace Agreement to end the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, presented by the GI, a civil society organisation in which both parties are represented • To develop a supplementary paper to address outstanding issues not included in the GI Water Annex
• To create a joint vision on common water issues to advance the peace process within the parameters of the Geneva Initiative, namely the twostate solution, agreed borders, status of Jerusalem, return of refugees, and security arrangements. • To provide an opportunity for the Geneva Initiative to meet Dutch experts in closed informal setting and to learn from international experiences and other approaches to transboundary water management.
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Working towards a negotiated agreement Four major steps: • Step 1: Stakeholder assessment • Step 2: Joint fact finding • Step 3: Facilitating multi-party problem-solving • Step 4: Developing forms of agreement that take account of the need for adaptive management
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
16 / 37
Step 1: Stakeholder assessment
• This involves private and not-for-attribution interviews with all the relevant stakeholder groups/organizations/individuals by a neutral or a team of professional neutrals. • Based on these interviews, the neutral prepares a matrix laying out areas of possible overlap and areas of likely conflict. • This can then be used by all the participants to structure an agenda, ground rules, time table and possible fact finding procedures
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Step 2: Joint fact finding • Unlike purely political negotiations, water negotiations must also take account of scientific forecasts and analyses. • If each side produces its own technical analyses, this can lead to the "battle of the print out" or "dueling scientists."
• Such confrontations usually mean that scientific input to the negotiations is devalued. • The way to avoid this, and to ensure that scientific input does not become a casualty of political disagreement, is to structure an appropriate joint fact finding process. • When and how this should happen, who should staff the technical work, how the research questions should be framed, etc. are all crucial.
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Step 2: Joint fact finding process (cont’d) Expert contributions (+ review) on five key topics (with 10 experts): 1.
Common international law principles and criteria for shared and rightful redistribution of water
2.
Future of the Joint Water Commission: Shared institutional arrangements & how to interact in a state-to-state relation?
3.
Water pricing: How to operationalize water pricing and to create incentives for cost recovery and the polluter pays principle?
4.
Demand management: how to operationalize demand management and how to increase water availability?
5.
Cross-border Wastewater Management
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Step 3: Facilitating multi-party problem-solving • Having parties agreed to a set of procedural protocols • Agreement on whatever scientific or technical input they require • Parties engage in a process of problem-solving (i.e. exploring ways to meet the most important interests on all sides simultaneously). • In science-intensive policy disputes (like transboundary water negotiations) there are opportunities for "value creation" and problem solving rather than conflict management as a more appropriate approach.
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
17 / 37
Step 3 (continued): Increasing the Pie • A shift can be made from a narrow focus on sharing water quantities towards a broader vision of sharing benefits > by identifying additional interests, creating options that had not previously been imagined, and generate opportunities for joint gain by trading across issues • Instead of approaching water division as a zero-game quantitive issue, a multi-functional usage approach is more realistic, and will provide higher benefits for all. 1.
Treating and reusing domestic water supply for agriculture is the most direct way of multiple use, already applied widely in Israel, but not yet in Palestine
2.
Water in the Jordan River may be used for ecological purposes; for tourism and economic development; for domestic water supply, and again for agricultural water supply, altogether multiplying the value of each m3 of water
Step 4: Areas of agreement 1. Agreed-on principles and definitions 2. Increase demand management and awareness raising the options for demand management
about
3. Initiate mutually beneficial projects / pilot projects to build trust
4. Joint fact-finding as an essential process to build trust: recognition of uncertainties in data, need for open and shared databases, and mutual recognition of each others problems 5. Both parties recognize that cross-border wastewater management is urgently needed 6. Operationalize water pricing and to create incentives for cost recovery and the polluter pays principle
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Step 4: Areas of agreement (cont’d) 6. Future Joint Water Commission requires further operationalization, i.e. shared institutional arrangements & how to interact in a state-to-state relation? 7. PWA needs institutional strengthening and capacity building, e.g. to harmonize donor input, and to arrive at equal standing with IWA 8. Importance of time-dimension, e.g. long-term solutions versus urgent short term solutions, how to avoid irreversible environmental problems, also taking into account the necessity of humanitarian needs. Some interventions are needed now!
9. Need for a joint research agenda for the integration of issues and stimulate cooperation within the educational field and academic communities
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Conclusions • An agreement was reached last week at The Hague Institute on the further operationalization of the Water Annex. • This Track II agreement is intended to be used by GI to show that a peace agreement is possible and the agreement itself is used to influence and inform previous and future Track I Peace Negotiations.
that an
• In the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and in general, cooperation over shared water resources is an important opportunity to build mutual trust. • Better basic services delivery, such as clean water, sanitation and adequate water for agriculture, will significantly improve the humanitarian and economic situation of Palestinians. Hence, reaching on agreement on water can take away grounds of protest and violence, and thus limit public support for extremist movements. • Cooperation over shared water resources in the region is a huge (untapped) potential for supporting peace and stability in the region.
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
18 / 37
Ongoing projects on water and climate diplomacy at The Hague Institute 1.
Mediation in the Israeli-Palestinian water conflict
2.
The Political Economy of Water Management in Yemen: Conflict Analysis and Recommendations, Netherlands Embassy in Sana’a.
3.
Framework for Political-Economy Analysis (PEAF) for Transboundary River Basins in Africa, for CIWA World Bank, in collaboration with SIWI and ODI
4.
Integrated and Transboundary NGO-based Master Plan for the Lower Jordan Basin, funded by the European Commission, in collaboration with RoyalHaskoningDHV and local partners in Israel, Palestine and Jordan
5.
Governance of Climate Adaptation in Small Island Development States (SIDS): Pilot Zanzibar, funded by The Hague Institute, in collaboration with Ministry of Environment, Deltares, Wageningen University and Erasmus University
6.
Water Diplomacy: Making Water Cooperation Work, with the Lower Jordan River Basin as one of its major case-studies, next to the Brahmaputra-Ganges basin in South Asia. In collaboration with SIWI, IUCN, EcoPeace Middle East, Helmholz Centre (UFZ), Uppsala University, UNESCO Cat. II Centre on International Water Cooperation, and the Water Diplomacy Program of Tufts University, MIT and Harvard Law School
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
Thank you!
www.waterdiplomacyconsortium.org
The Hague Institute 1/5/2015 | @HagueInstitute
© Copy-right: P. Huntjens, 2014
Distributive and procedural justice in UN climate talks • Key challenge: how to satify different notions of justice • Current climate negotiations revolve for a large part around distributive justice, including core principles of equality, compensation and proportionality > parties cannot agree which one is fundamental to govern • These issues need to be resolved, otherwise there is no progress (i.e. 'unavoidability of justice'). • In successful negotiations parties often find agreement on how to balance and combine several justice principles > one overarching principle is not possible to cover complexity and all nuances • By also including procedural justice the effectiveness of the agreement is boosted. In trade negotiations, in bilateral arms control, multilateral environmental talks, taking into account procedural justice led to effective agreement (see works of Cecilia Albin).
The Hague Institute | @HagueInstitute 1/5/2015
19 / 37
Joop de Schutter (UNESCO-IHE)
Trans-boundary Water Management Research and Education at UNESCO-IHE Case Study Central Asia
Joop de Schutter with contributions from Dinara Ziganshina and Zaki Shubber , December 2014
UNESCO-IHE ORGANISATION & STRUCTURE
UNESCO-IHE CORE ACTIVITIES
Focus on Human Resources and Institutional Development
20 / 37
UNESCO-IHE & WATER MANAGEMENT Water Management Addressing water challenges requires that water managers apply an integrated and interdisciplinary approach, involving hydrological, biophysical, chemical, economic, institutional, legal, policymaking and planning aspects. The Water Management Programme provides such an approach.
WATER CONFLICT MANAGEMENT Water Conflict Management MSc Aim is to study the management of water resources conflicts, focusing on negotiation, mediation and decision-making processes, in order to prevent, manage and resolve water conflicts. Tailor made short courses are available as well. Course designed for water managers as well as for institutional, legal and international relations experts interested in local, national and international water management. The students receive from UNESCO-IHE an MSc degree in Water Management with a specialization in Water Conflict Management. Course organized in cooperation with the UNESCO-IHP programme and with the UNESCO Cat 2 Centre on Water Law in Dundee, Scotland
WATER CONFLICT MANAGEMENT Water Management & Governance The research programme on water management and governance is centered on the conviction that the social, biophysical and technological processes of water systems are intrinsically linked. Only by understanding these processes and linkages is it possible to fully understand the complexity of water systems and develop innovative ways of governing and managing water in a sustainable way. UNESCO-IHE is involved in research and development work in many river basins around the world including the basins of the Nile, Zambesi, Incomati, Mekong, Jordan, Niger and the Aral Sea Basin. The research in all cases tries to combine technical water management principles with legal and governance aspects in order to support planning and decision processes between stakeholders in a water management system.
Central Asia and the Aral Sea Basin
21 / 37
History of the Aral Sea
Aral Sea 2011
Reconstruction of the geography of Central Asia based on historical data
Since ancient times the Aral Sea and the delta’s of the Amudarya and of the Syrdarya have plaid a key role in the development of irrigated agriculture in Central Asia. The level of the Aral Sea has changed depending on wet and dry climate conditions between higher than 72 MBSL (Mean Baltic Sea Level) to completely dry, when for example the Amudarya discharged into the Caspian Sea through the Uzboy channel. The previously largest drop in the Aral Sea level was observed at the beginning of the nineteenth century, when by 1846 large parts of the former sea had turned into vast desert areas. Today, as a result of overexploitation of water for irrigated agriculture mainly, the levels have dropped to below 30 MBSL.
Russian Colonization
Caspian
Sea
The Russian tsarist government decided to institutionalize the precolonial land and water relations in Turkistan in Central Asia on June 12, 1886, when Tsar Alexander II approved the so-called Regulations for Governance of Turkistan Krai. These krais (provinces) became large administrative units in the Soviet territorial system in 1924. The Russians started to develop irrigated agriculture first following the example of the British led large scale irrigated agriculture development model in India. The Turkistan Administration of Irrigation Works (IRTUR) was established to lead the challenge towards large scale irrigated agriculture development in Central Asia and cotton became the main product.
Map of Central Asia (Turkestan) by Massalsky (1913)
Large scale, modernized, irrigation development
Karshi Irrigation Systems
Map of the Karakum Canal (maximum headflow is 550 m3/sec) region. Works started as early as 1953. with the establishment of camps in Mary City by Sredazgidrostroy.
In August 1950, the government of the USSR adopted a resolution on the transition towards new irrigation systems that foresaw in improved use of irrigated lands, larger irrigated units up to a size suitable for highly mechanized land treatment (8– 10 hectares), the replacement of permanent field irrigated networks with temporary irrigated ditches, and (most importantly) the leveling of irrigated lands. These activities under the fourth and fifth five-year plans (1946–1950 and 1951–1956) were accompanied by modernized and standardized mechanization of construction and repair works, as well as the introduction of heavy machinery for development and maintenance of irrigation canals and structures. First activities concentrated on the Syrdarya. Later on the engineers moved to the Amudarya with plans for hydropower systems up to a capacity of 100,000 kW, and support irrigation of 1,300,000 hectares in the southern districts of the Trans-Caspian plain in Western Turkmenistan (Karakum Canal).
Development of dams and reservoirs The effect of the measures taken is demonstrated by a considerable increase in output of different agricultural products. By1980 the production of raw cotton had increased by 2.6 million tons or almost 50% as compared to 1965 levels, cereal output more than tripled, and vegetable, potato and fruit outputs were up by 2.7, 1.5 and 3 times respectively. Overall cotton was the most profitable crop.
The expansion of both irrigated land areas and the growing importance of agriculture for the economy of Central Asia required large scale infrastructure (dams and reservoirs) development.
However, the system was also highly vulnerable as was shown during 1974 and 1975, when two successive dry years caused a very critical reduction of river flows and consequently “water scarcity”. At the same time salinization became a problem and the levels of the Aral Sea started to fall. Water salinity in the Syr Darya increased from 0.5 g/l up to 1.3 g/l, and in the Amu Darya River from 0.7 g/l to 1.2 g/l on average
22 / 37
Towards Independent States in Central Asia By the end of the 1980’s, shortly before the brakeup of the Soviet Union, the Central Asian states were left with an infrastructure which was largely undermaintained and suffering from problems related to allocation of water to the main users Irrigated Agriculture and Hydropwer.
The Sib-Aral project was one latest answer to the increasing problems with the management and allocation of water resources in Central Asia
From a one union state management and decision making system, Central Asia had to move towards a multi country, multi stakeholder, situation. One early answer was the establishment of the Interstate Commission for Water Coordination (ICWC) and the Agreement on Co-operation in the Field of Joint Water Resources Management and Conservation of Interstate Sources (October 12, 1991)
Water Scenario’s / Serious Challenges ? There are three groups of threats that tend to be highlighted:
Assuming a population growth rate and replenishment of renewable water resources at present levels, water availability in Central Asia should be sufficient for the next 25-35 years. Over this period, even under a pessimistic scenario (little innovation; little cooperation), the available water resources per capita in the region would amount to some 1400 m3 per person per year, which is much more than in countries with a real high water deficit such as Israel and Jordan (200 m3 pp).
i) internal threats (incompleteness of political reforms and the unsatisfactory socioeconomic situation), ii) regional threats (contradictions and challenges in political, socioeconomic and environmental policies) and iii) external threats (geopolitical forces that play a role in Central Asia and the situation in the neighboring countries). All suggest that the five countries (plus Afghanistan) are “doomed” to co-operate as the only way to withstand regional threats and as a tool to facilitate the settling of internal problems in each country.
Water Diplomacy for Independent States
Transparency: Data, Information, Knowledge Base
Current Challenges • Increase transparency and trust to data, monitoring and information exchange and administration • Signing regional agreements on information and monitoring
23 / 37
Capacity Development for Water Management and Planning
Current Challenges •Over-dependence on donors •Lack of support from governments •Deteriorating education and research system •Poor coordination among institutes and countries •Lack of career incentives for water professionals
Transparency: Information, Analysis, Communication Knowing the resources is essential for decision planning and decision making for water in a river basin. Data and models are tools available to that purpose. For Central Asia, the Aral Sea Basin Management Model (ASBmm) is being developed with the main aim of enabling better informed decision making on water related issues in the Aral Sea Basin on the basis of combined modelling of various water use and development scenarios. The model is accessible for communication through the internet site of SIC-ICWC.
Current Challenges •Increase accuracy, actuality and accessibility of the model (better data, internet, etc.). •Produce interfaces that allow use of the model by many different user groups (common people, journalists, scientists, politicians, students, etc.). •Increase and improve set of performance indicators
Scenario analysis in the ASBmm
Water withdrawal and availability in the Aral Sea Basin
Challenge: Water diplomacy is required to help develop a rationale for water allocation based on balanced interests between countries and user groups
24 / 37
The complexity of cooperation / Work for Diplomats Issues discussed
Reference number for ICWC minutes of meeting
Ensuring taxation and customs supervision and border control on preferential terms for the interstate water organizations as provided by articles 9 and 10 of the action program signed by the EC-ICAS members
Minutes 8 (1994), 12, 13
Establishing regular information exchange between the ICWC executive bodies and national water management organizations. Developing the information system and regulations for its operations.
Minutes 10 (1995), 12, 16,19, 22, 24, 25, 26, 30
for most part
Ensuring environmental base (minimum) flows through the Syr Darya and Amu Darya rivers.
Minutes 12 (1995), 33, 34 Minutes 12 (1995), 13
no
Minutes 13 (1995) Minutes 13 (1996), 18, 20, 22 Minutes 15 (1996)
partly partly
Minutes 15 (1996), 31, 32, 33, 34 Minutes 16
partly
Minutes 16, 18
partly
Elaborating regional and national criteria for water consumption in the region. The necessity of involving prime ministers in ICWC activities.
Minutes 17
no
Minutes 17
no
The necessity of creating a water and energy consortium.
Minutes 17
no
Preparing and co-ordinating the main provisions of the regional water strategy. Maintenance of riverbeds and flood control. Allocating funds for O&M of water infrastructure on transboundary watercourses. Lack of a mechanism for the examination of interstate projects. Lack of regulations for cooperation with donors. Unsatisfactory links with hydro-meteorological services and the insufficient accuracy of hydrological forecasts. Strengthening activities in the framework of adopted agreements.
Final decision made?
(yes/no) no
yes
no
partly
Negotiations and decisions between independent countries are subject to very complex and time and energy consuming processes. In the process of growing priorities for national interests above regional interests the situation has only grown in complexity. Under a one government regime water allocation was based on agriculture as a priority principle. In the current situation hydrower and environment are important elements of the equation as well.
Geopolitical Developments / Balancing Interests The secret is in balancing national and regional interests per sector in an atmosphere of transparancy. Some of the reported events and approaches over the current decade are: • The opening of the Central Asia-China gas pipeline at the end of 2009 was one of the latest and most vivid illustration of China’s growing influence in the energy rich and strategically important Central Asia region. • In 2006, the governments of Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Afghanistan and Pakistan signed a memorandum to develop a regional power market (KISI 2008). • President Xi Jinping in September 2013 took a tour of Central Asia and signing deals worth almost US$100 billion with four Central Asian states indicating that the overall volume of Chinese trade and investment will increase substantially in the years to come • In 2003 a draft agreement prepared by the RAO UES of Russia on the transfer of surplus electrical power from Central Asia to Russia was signed • In October 2004 a Russian Tadjiek agreement on long-term co-operation between RUSAL (an open joint stock company) and the government of the Republic of Tajikistan concerning the Rogun Hydropower Plant construction phase I project was signed. Work suspended in 2012 waiting a WB assessment. • After RAO UES of Russia failed to finish this, between 2006 to 2011 the Sanguta2 Hydropower Plant in Tadjikistan was built and is now operated by the Iranian company Sangob (International Farab Co). Revenues during the first 12 years would be paid to Iran - and after that, ownership would be transferred to Tajikistan • Etc.
Thank You
WWW.UNESCO-IHE.ORG WWW.ASBMM.UZ WWW.SIC.ICWC-ARAL.UZ WWW.CAWATER-INFO.NET
Water in the Media
Euphrates Tigris Basin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWcW7GZh33o The Water Channel http://thewaterchannel.tv/en/videos/categories/viewvideo Middle East Water Scarcity http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=if-ibJT-MzM
25 / 37
Maarten Hofstra (Water Governance Centre)
• • • • •
Water Diplomacy Consortium Seminar 4th December 2014
Good Governance, How to get there? • • • • •
Maarten Hofstra Water Governance Centre (NL)
Water governance Many definitions like: Water governance can be described as a range of political, social, economic and administrative systems that are in place to develop and manage water resources and the delivery of water services, at different levels of society (Global Water Partnership (2002)) I use “The three layer model of water governance” as a way to make clear what relevant elements of water governance can be distinguished and how they are interrelated.
26 / 37
The three layer approach
Content layer
Good water management practice needs knowledge and skills
Content layer
Institutional layer
Water management practice can only be successful if the institutional aspects are o.k.
Content layer organization
Institutional layer
Water management practice can only be successful if the institutional aspects are o.k.
27 / 37
Content layer organization
Institutional layer legislation
Water management practice can only be successful if the institutional aspects are o.k.
Content layer financing
organization
Institutional layer legislation
Water management practice can only be successful if the institutional aspects are o.k.
The three layer model of water governance
The three layer model of water governance
Three layer model with related questions
Content layer Institutional layer Relational layer
Is there a clear policy and planning for the water management? Do we have sufficient and relevant information? Do we have the necessary knowledge and skills? Are the roles and responsibilities clear? Do we have the necessary tools? Is functioning of the financing system ensured? Is the water policy well connected with other policy fields (e.g. spatial planning) Are all stakeholders involved in decision making for water management? Is there transparency in water management? Is there enough trust to work together?
Systematic discussion of these questions provides a good basis for solutions
28 / 37
Recent booklet WGC 5 Building blocks: •A powerful administrative organization •A legally embedded system of water management •A planning system •Adequate financing •A participatory approach
Download from the WGC website: http://www.watergovernancecentre.nl
Conflict --------------------- Cooperation
PCCP (From Potential Conflict to Cooperation Potential)
Four cases focussing on cooperation • Room for the River (a new concept implemented in an innovative way)
• Dynamic water management Noord Brabant (optimize water management by operational cooperation water authorities)
• Combining forces in Noord Holland (making projects possible by regional cooperation in different policy fields)
• Revitalization of an international river basin
(transboundary cooperation in restoring the River Rhine)
Double aim of Room for the River 1. Safety
29 / 37
Double aim of Room for the River 2. Spatial quality
The Room for the River planning area • • • •
3 ministries 5 Provinces 16 Waterboards 100 Municipalities
34 projects carried out along the river branches of the Rhine All governance levels are involved in implemetation of the projects
appr. 3000 ha 200 people 50 households 25 farms
‘depoldering’ noordwaard
Process • Together with inhabitants and stakeholders a regional alternative has been developed (small compartments). • This regional alternative has been accepted bij de State Secretary as the prefered alternative
30 / 37
• meerdere dia’s met foto’s uit proces
Room for the river • Some aspects of its successes – Stakeholders involved from the beginning (relational layer)
– Flexibility in implementation within certain preconditions: omwisselbesluit / interchangeable decision (institutional layer) – Effective use of knowledge and skills of partners (content layer) – Cooperation based on a good mix of trust and control (relational layer)
Creating retention capacity in Noord Holland
Creating retention capacity in Noord Holland
Regional water authority “Hollands Noorderkwartier”
31 / 37
Regional project: Find room for water retention
Budget limited
Creating water retention Verenigde Polders Bergen
W. Joop
Cooperation with different stakeholders to combine goals • • • • • •
14 ha water rention area 24 ha ecological development area 24 ha extensive agrariculture Health crare farm 1,4 km natural embankments Recreation facilities
• Clay can be used for strenghtening dikes in stead of being removed against substantional costs
Financial overview Totale projectkosten: 2,844 miljoen • • • • • • •
Wate retention Regional dikes Stichting de Brink Synergiefonds Province Province EHS Municipality Bergen
200 keuro 600 keuro 255 keuro 624 keuro 400 keuro 700 keuro 70 keuro
→7% → 21 % →9% → 22 % →14 % →25 % → 2%
32 / 37
Over ‘t Hek (Across the fence)
Water retention-agriculture-naturerecreation
Creating retention capacity in Noord Holland
Regional water authority “Hollands Noorderkwartier”
Regional water authority Aa en Maas National water authority Rijkswaterstaat Regional water authority De Dommel
1995
Dynamic water management (smart water management) approaches the water system as a whole Discharge and storage of the water can be better utilized Reducing Extremes (peaks and troughs) in the system by guiding water in a smart way. At the national level, but also in the region!
94
17 juni 2011
33 / 37
Optimization by working together If optimization succeeds: • Adaptations in the water system can be less substantial or can be delayed for years • The costs for these adaptations can be less than foreseen • We get a better distribution of water in space and time • The energy used for pumping can be reduced substantially
How to optimize •
We look at the cranes and valves in our water systems (sluices, pumping stations, weirs, storm surge barriers) over the whole system
•
We adjust them if necessary so that they are flexible in use
•
We use them in a smart way at the right time and matched
Of course this requires good cooperation of all water autorities
In case of Noord Brabant • The purpose of the pilot Dynamic Water Management North Brabant is to reduce the problem of flooding in the North Brabant water systems by optimally utilize the water discharge capacity and when making choices always to choose for the societal optimum.
Heavy rain causing local flooding
34 / 37
Dynamic water management in Noord Brabant
To reach a point at the horizon Study flood problems
Deciding about measures
Dicharge protocol
Water agreement
Dynamic water management
Implementation steering infrastructure
Basic hydrological models
DSS 2.0 basis
DSS 2.0 steering
Realization retention areas
What is there to win? •
By having a good view at each other's interests and because and no discussion about the quality of the prediction and the advice is needed, good and quick decisions can be made about the measures to be taken.
•
By the good cooperation Rijkswaterstaat has well in advance anticipated on the discharge through its channels. Water retention areas have been used in an optimal way. Occurance of flood damage in urban areas of Helmond, Eindhoven and around Den Bosch has been prevented.
•
In flood situations with a high probability of occurrence between the 1:10 year and 1: 100 years, such uncontrolled inundations, and thus major damage can be prevented
•
The same dynamic steering can also be used in drought situations.
At what price •
One centrally managed model based on real-time data and forecasts which generates recommendations for the distribution of the discharge
•
Administrative agreement on dynamic control, based on the principle of optimization of the total. Part of this are agreements on cost sharing afterwards
•
Investments in infrastructure are being made in the light of overall optimization of the entire system: jointly investing in the biggest bottlenecks.
35 / 37
This should not happen again!
Special analysis of water governance aspects Looking at: • The necessary knowledge and skills • The clear division of responsibilities • Juridical aspects of such a cooperation • Financing (e.g. costs and profits not with the same party; inheritance) • How to deal with liabilities for damages • Type of agreement and detailing of it. • Cooperation to build up and maintain trust • Transparancy to other parties • ……
The river Rhine
Dutch border Cooperation in the Rhine basin with: -Switzerland -Germany -France -Luxembourg -Netherlands
The Salmon as a symbol of a healthy river
36 / 37
International cooperation
What makes it work?
Trust !
RIZA
What makes the ICPR effective? Rules of cooperation De-centralised organisation National Delegations political mandate technical know how funds Consensus Decisions are recommendations Obligation to report about implementing measures Political trust, no sanctions Neutral secretariat •Rhine Convention •Rules of procedure and financial regulations
Plenary assembly Luxembourg
All in the same boat!
37 / 37 A successful return
Water: clean enough Mating upstream in rivers (D & F) Restoration of continuity Restocking with small salmons Optimisation of habitats Example Saynbach: No weirs, good habitat => Natural reproduction of salmon
General conclusion The content is not unimportant
Content layer Institutional layer
Relational layer
A good orgnization, financing and legislation are basic prerequisites
Invest in relations!!
Thank you for your kind attention
