Presentation on 'Assessment of the Water-Food-Energy-Ecosystems Nexus in transboundary river basins: the Alazani/Ganikh Basin Pilot', by Annukka Lipponen from UNECEat 2014 UN-Water Annual International Zaragoza Conference. Preparing for World Water Day 2014: Partnerships for improving water and energy access, efficiency and sustainability. 13-16 January 2014
Overview presentation on transboundary cooperation. Lessons learned from wate...
Similar to Assessment of the Water-Food-Energy-Ecosystems Nexus in transboundary river basins: the Alazani/Ganikh Basin Pilot, by Annukka Lipponen from UNECE
Similar to Assessment of the Water-Food-Energy-Ecosystems Nexus in transboundary river basins: the Alazani/Ganikh Basin Pilot, by Annukka Lipponen from UNECE (20)
Assessment of the Water-Food-Energy-Ecosystems Nexus in transboundary river basins: the Alazani/Ganikh Basin Pilot, by Annukka Lipponen from UNECE
1. Assessment of the Water-Food-EnergyEcosystems Nexus in transboundary
river basins: the Alazani/Ganikh Basin
Pilot
Annukka Lipponen
United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe (UNECE)
Manuel Welsch, Lucia de Strasser,
Sebastian Hermann,
Mark Howells
KTH Royal Institute of Technology,
Stockholm, Sweden
2. Assessment of the water-foodenergy-ecosystems nexus under
the Water Convention in selected basins
• Part of the Convention’s Work Programme 2013-2015
• Work overseen and guided by the Task Force on the WaterFood-Energy-Ecosystems Nexus
• Some 6-8 basins to be assessed – pan-Europe, Africa, Asia;
different nexus settings, climate, resource scarcity etc.
• Key partners: Finland (lead)/Finnish Environment Institute
SYKE, FAO, Royal Institute of Technology (Stockholm)
• Methodology developed, piloted & going through stakeholder
consultation
• Basin assessments January 2014 - April 2015; report August
2015
3. What does the nexus entail
in a transboundary context?
• Finding a balance between various uses and protection of
the resource: address the trade offs and increase synergies
• Necessary to coordinate plans & management measures
between the riparian countries ― nexus further complicated!
• Needed:
• Increased understanding, dialogue and participation
• Effective institutions and legal frameworks
• Decision-support tools (monitoring, impact assessment
etc.)
• Regulations, economic tools
• Sharing / solidarity/political willingness
4. Some Key Features of the
Methodological Approach/process…
Participatory processes Capacity building
Sound scientific analysis Collective effort
Knowledge mobilization
5. Diagnostic Phase
The nexus analysis starts with a large-spectrum set of questions regarding
the natural and socio-economical conditions, and human interaction with the
environment of the target basin.
This performed by:
• Joint identification of the pressing inter-sectoral
issues with national sectoral administrations and
basin stakeholders (workshop)
• Develop and distribute a «diagnostic questionaire»
• Using available statistics data and indicators
Water scarcity?
Pollution?
Biodiversity?
Irrigation? Floods? Erosion?
Climate Change?
Growing demand?
6. Diagnostic Phase
some examples of indicators and their potential interlinkages
WATER
- Water
withdrawals?
- Share of
groundwater
use?
- Sectoral water
demands
(agriculture)
- ….
FOOD &
LAND USE
- Food selfsufficiency?
- Agricultural
efficiency (water
demand?)
- Fertilizer and
pumping
requirements?
- Biofuel policies?
….
ENERGY
ECOSYSTEMS
CLIMATE
- Water footprint
of energy
technologies?
- Energy mix
- Energy selfsufficiency?
Energy demand
for agriculture?
- ….
- Protected areas
and vulnerable
zones?
- Biodiversity
hotspots
- Endangered
species?
- Ecosystem
services affected?
- ….
- Likely affected
by climate
change?
- An increase /
decrease in
water
availability?
- ….
8. Alazani/Ganikh pilot assessment:
Azerbaijan & Georgia
Interactive multi-sectoral basin workshop in Kachreti, Georgia,
25-27 November 2013; organised in cooperation with
UNDP/GEF project “Reducing Transboundary Degradation in
the Kura Aras River Basin” and the Ministry of Environment
Protection and Natural Resources of Georgia
Among the participants:
ministries of environment,
energy, agriculture,
emergency situations;
communities;
agencies, companies;
civil society
9. Energy
Land / Food
Using
Gasification
Firewood as
and
Electrificatio
primary
nenergy
of Rural
Areas
source
Reforestation
Deforestation
Energy
Growth
Degradation of
Improvement
of Hydrological
Hydrological
Regime
Water
With Improved
Water
Management
Restoration of
Loss of
ecosystems
services
Ecosystems
10. Identification of potential solutions
jointly with the riparian countries and
between the sectors
• What the countries plan? Are the plans of the different
sectors compatible? What do changing drivers & the
climate outlook mean for the nexus? How to better
reconcile the different uses?
• What opportunities there are to reduce negative
intersectoral impacts and enhance synergy? Institutional
arrangements at transboundary level conducive to
intersectoral coordination?
• Diverse solutions! Changes to
policies, new policies, management
and measures practices, institutional
arrangements, ways the
infrastructure is operated ...
11. Tendencies & particularities of the
Alazani/Ganikh case
• Development pressures: inter-sectoral considerations timely
• Expansion of hydropower in Georgia (new energy strategy)
• Gasification available in urban areas but remains beyond
affordability for many (GE)
• Large state programmes; state companies and operators
• IWRM plans under development in Georgia and in
Azerbaijan with GEF support
• Agreement on transboundary waters being negotiated (AZGE); multi-sector representation from the countries
12. Some concluding points:
(1) What can the governments do?
• Ensuring collection of relevant data & information,
making it available
• Ensuring a rational and predictable policy framework
to help spur the development and adoption of more water
efficient technologies in the energy sector
• Setting appropriate permit conditions for sectoral
development projects, requiring EIA (also transboundary)
• Strategic planning of locating infrastructure projects
• Ensuring relevant sectors' representation and
consultation also in institutions for transboundary
cooperation
13. Some concluding points:
(2) Challenges and opportunities
• Commonly channels & forums for dialogue & coordination
absent or undeveloped, both at national and transboundary levels
• very few methods or diagnostic tools that allow for fast and
quantitative appraisal of nexus issues; need to appraise
consistent inter-sectoral scenarios (compound effects!)
• water not valued consistently between sectors
• By sharing information and through dialogue by applying
assessment tools (including mapping and models), it is possible
to find win-win opportunities
• shortages raise awareness about vulnerabilities and can trigger
more rationalised use of water
• knowledge base improving, good practices getting
disseminated (context specificity!)
Editor's Notes
Potentially behind the short-comings:Missing agreements/institutionsLimited mandate of existing institutions Composition of institutions and decision-making processesWeak enforcement capacity etc.Not enough to look at the interlinkages and impacts between the sectors NOWWhat are the trends and anticipated demands?What are the concrete development plans — expansion of irrigation? Increase in renewable energies?The assumptions about the conditions and availability of resources to achieve this future successfully? What does it require from other sectors? Are the different objectives compatibles?
Capacity building - supporting mutual learning across basins, sectors and State borders;Collective effort that brings together a broad range of expertise & views (sectors, countries, IGOs, civil society…)