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