Cascao Hydropolitics Twm Mena 2008 (3 November)


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Cascao Hydropolitics Twm Mena 2008 (3 November)

    1. 1. Hydropolitics in the MENA Region Ana Elisa Cascão King’s College of London Presentation to TWM 2008 MENA 2nd-3rd November 2008 3rd November
    2. 2. 2 - International Water Law <ul><li>International Water Law - watercourses and groundwater </li></ul><ul><li>Main legal frameworks </li></ul><ul><li>IWL in the MENA region </li></ul><ul><li>Successes and failures </li></ul><ul><li>Nexus water, law & politics </li></ul><ul><li>Law as a tool for conflict resolution/ prevention? </li></ul>EXERCISE 2: Nile Basin case – How to apply IWL?
    3. 3. Main international legal frameworks <ul><li>1966 Helsinki Rules on the Uses of the Waters of International Rivers (ILA) </li></ul><ul><li>1997 United Nations Convention on the Law of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses (ILC) </li></ul><ul><li>2004 Berlin Rules on Water Resources (ILA) </li></ul><ul><li>2008 Draft Articles on the Law of Transboundary Aquifers (ILC) </li></ul>   
    4. 4. UN CONVENTION – MENA’ POSITIONS <ul><li>VOTING (1997) </li></ul><ul><li>In favour: </li></ul><ul><li>Algeria, Bahrain, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen </li></ul><ul><li>Against: </li></ul><ul><li>Turkey </li></ul><ul><li>Abstained: </li></ul><ul><li>Egypt, Ethiopia, Israel </li></ul><ul><li>Absent: </li></ul><ul><li>Lebanon </li></ul><ul><li>STATUS (2008) </li></ul><ul><li>Ratification: </li></ul><ul><li>Syria (1998) </li></ul><ul><li>Jordan (1999) </li></ul><ul><li>Accession: </li></ul><ul><li>Lebanon (1999) </li></ul><ul><li>Libya (1999) </li></ul><ul><li>Qatar (2002) </li></ul><ul><li>Iraq (2005) </li></ul><ul><li>Signature only: </li></ul><ul><li>Tunisia (2000) </li></ul><ul><li>Yemen (2000 ) </li></ul>
    5. 5. Campaigns for the ratification of UN Convention <ul><li>GOALS: </li></ul><ul><li> Ratification </li></ul><ul><li>Entry into force </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation </li></ul><ul><li>Policy guidelines </li></ul><ul><li>Level playing field </li></ul><ul><li>PREVENT: </li></ul><ul><li>Unilateral Action </li></ul><ul><li>Legal weaknesses </li></ul><ul><li>Water misgovernance </li></ul><ul><li>Conflicts </li></ul> World Development Movement World Wildlife Fund
    6. 6. IWL ON THE GROUND MENA Shared Basins and Aquifers No agreement Agreement; although partial or not all-inclusive Agreement informed by IWL principles <ul><li>Nile Basin </li></ul><ul><li>Jordan Basin </li></ul><ul><li>Tigris-Euphrates Basin </li></ul><ul><li>Asi-Orontes Basin </li></ul><ul><li>Niger Basin </li></ul><ul><li>Lake Chad </li></ul><ul><li>Nubian Aquifer </li></ul><ul><li>Disi Aquifer </li></ul><ul><li>Majority of the </li></ul><ul><li>transboundary aquifers </li></ul><ul><li>Al-Kabir Al-Janoubi Basin </li></ul>
    7. 7. “ Mission unaccomplished” Agreement; although partial or not all-inclusive     <ul><li>Not all-inclusive </li></ul><ul><li>No volumetric water allocations </li></ul><ul><li>No provisions on information exchange </li></ul>Niger River / Lake Chad Agreements <ul><li>Unequal allocations </li></ul><ul><li>“ Fake” joint management </li></ul><ul><li>Constraints on Palestinian development of water resources (eg do not include Jordan River waters) </li></ul><ul><li>“ Prior use” argument </li></ul>1995 Oslo Water Regime (Israel/Palestine) <ul><li>Bilateral Agreement </li></ul><ul><li>Deliberate (constructive) ambiguity </li></ul><ul><li>Difficulties on implementation </li></ul><ul><li>Destructive Ambiguity </li></ul>1994 Israeli-Jordanian Water Agreement (Israel/Jordan) <ul><li>Complex negotiations </li></ul><ul><li>No volumetric water allocations </li></ul><ul><li>Treaty secession or not? </li></ul><ul><li>Deliberate ambiguity </li></ul><ul><li>No ratification or political commitment </li></ul>2007 Nile Cooperative Framework Agreement (all Nile riparians) <ul><li>Bilateral agreement </li></ul><ul><li>Volumetric water allocations </li></ul><ul><li>Unequal allocations </li></ul><ul><li>Colonial background </li></ul><ul><li>“ Prior use” argument </li></ul>1959 Agreement for the Full Utilisation of the Nile Waters (Egypt/Sudan) RELATED PROBLEMS EXAMPLES OF AGREEMENTS
    8. 8. Transboundary Aquifers - “Long way to go” <ul><li>STATUS: </li></ul><ul><li>No Agreement in majority of transboundary MENA aquifers </li></ul><ul><li>Only draft of Law of Transboundary Aquifers </li></ul><ul><li>Limited achievements regarding regional cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>PROBLEMS: </li></ul><ul><li>“ Invisible” resource </li></ul><ul><li>“ Pumping race” – over-abstraction </li></ul><ul><li>Strong environmental impacts </li></ul><ul><li>Process of political “silentisation” </li></ul><ul><li>COOPERATION: </li></ul><ul><li>Ongoing negotiations: Northwest Sahara Aquifer System, Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System, Basalt Aquifer (Jordan-Syria), Shallow Aquifer (Oman-UAE), Wajid Sandstone (Saudi Arabia-Yemen), Wasia-Biyadh/Mukallah Deep Aquifer (Oman-Yemen) </li></ul>No agreement  
    9. 9. 2002 Agreement on Al-Kabir Al-Janoubi River (Lebanon-Syria) Agreement informed by IWL principles Agreement is derived from relevant provisions of international law and, in particular, the United Nations Convention 
    10. 10. <ul><li>Participants will play the role of the diverse negotiatiors and external parties involved in the negotiations for a new Nile Treaty </li></ul><ul><li>Discuss and reflect on the application of the UN Convention articles: </li></ul>EXERCISE 2: Nile Basin case – how to apply IWL? <ul><li>Which body will be responsible? </li></ul><ul><li>Arbitration? </li></ul>Article 33: Settlement of disputes <ul><li>Mechanisms? </li></ul><ul><li>How this relates to old and new hydraulic infrastructures? </li></ul>Articles 24, 25 and 26: Management and regulation <ul><li>How to include, guarantee and protect ecosystems? </li></ul><ul><li>Which mechanisms can be used? </li></ul><ul><li>How this relates to old and new hydraulic infrastructures? </li></ul>Articles 20, 21 and 23: Protection of ecosystems and the marine environment, prevention of pollution <ul><li>How to share data? </li></ul><ul><li>What about prior notification? </li></ul><ul><li>Which mechanisms to notify and inform? </li></ul><ul><li>Which institution will supervise the process? </li></ul>Articles 8 and 9: General obligation to cooperate, regular exchange of data and information <ul><li>How to measure harm? </li></ul><ul><li>Which are the obligations of upstream countries? </li></ul><ul><li>What happens to “prior” uses? </li></ul>Article 7: Obligation not to cause serious Harm <ul><li>How to translate equitable and reasonable on the ground? </li></ul><ul><li>Weight of each factor? </li></ul><ul><li>How to define the water allocation of each of the 10 riparians? </li></ul><ul><li>What occurs if new infrastructures are built? </li></ul>Articles 5 and 6: Equitable and reasonable utilization and participation and related factors Potential Nile Treaty UN Convention
    11. 11. <ul><li>Discuss and reflect on how to operationalise the Principle of Equitable and Reasonable Utilisation in the Nile River Basin: </li></ul>EXERCISE 2: Nile Basin case – how to apply IWL? 7 - The availability of alternatives, of comparable value, to a particular planned or existing use. 6 - Conservation, protection, development and economy of use of the water resources of the watercourse and the costs of measures taken to that effect; 5 - Existing and potential uses of the watercourse; 4 - The effects of the use or uses of the watercourses in one watercourse State on other watercourse States; 3 - The population dependent on the watercourse in each watercourse State; 2 - The social and economic needs of the watercourse States concerned; SOME RELEVANT QUESTIONS: Weight of each factor? Future needs vs. Present uses? Existing vs. Potential uses? Impacts of water utilisation upstream – how to measure? Alternative water resources – within or outside the Basin? 1 - Geographic, hydrographic, hydrological, climatic, ecological and other factors of a natural character; Potential Nile Treaty FACTORS (Art. 6 UN Convention)
    12. 12. Nexus – Water, Law and Politics WATER LAW & POLITICS <ul><li>NEGOTIATIONS OF TRANSBOUNDARY WATER LEGAL AGREEMENTS </li></ul><ul><li>ARE HIGHLY POLITICISED PROCESSES – </li></ul><ul><li>Asymmetric Power Politics are determinant </li></ul><ul><li>Contextual power is key for conclusion/delaying of agreements </li></ul><ul><li>Equitable and reasonable utilisation is difficult to operationalise </li></ul><ul><li>Negotiations on volumetric water allocations are highly problematic </li></ul>
    13. 13. Conclusion <ul><li>International Water Law </li></ul><ul><li>Set of useful guidelines for transboundary water management </li></ul><ul><li>ILW: A mean, not an end by itself </li></ul><ul><li>Power Politics  International Water Law </li></ul><ul><li>Power Politics  Negotiations & Political Commitment </li></ul><ul><li>Law as a tool for conflict resolution/ prevention? </li></ul>3 HYDROPOLITICAL COOPERATION 1 NEXUS WATER AND POLITICS
    14. 14. 3 - CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND COOPERATION <ul><li>Transboundary river basins: Conflict or/and Cooperation? </li></ul><ul><li>Conflicts, diplomacy and deadlocks </li></ul><ul><li>Transboundary cooperation – overcoming deadlocks? </li></ul><ul><li>Main cooperative attempts in the MENA region </li></ul><ul><li>Cooperation is as political as water </li></ul>EXERCISE 3: If I was a donor…
    15. 15. Transboundary river basins: Conflict or Cooperation?  CONFLICT   COOPERATION  CONFLICT ? COOPERATION ? Reality is not Black & White ! Conflict and Cooperation Co-exist Mirumachi 2007 HOW? 
    16. 16. Diplomatic conflict, not war! Wolf et al 2003 Diplomatic, strong or mild verbal official hostility Conflict resolution: Political and diplomatic 
    17. 17. Typical conflictive situation Typical conflictive situation Riparian A Riparian B Deadlock <ul><li>DON’T </li></ul><ul><li>Agree in positions </li></ul><ul><li>and arguments </li></ul><ul><li>No data-sharing </li></ul><ul><li>No negotiations </li></ul><ul><li>No political commitment </li></ul><ul><li>No common projects </li></ul><ul><li>No cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>DO </li></ul><ul><li>Securitise </li></ul><ul><li>Use egoistic arguments </li></ul><ul><li>Confidentiality of information </li></ul><ul><li>Refuse concessions </li></ul><ul><li>Play with time </li></ul><ul><li>Threats </li></ul>
    18. 18. Cooperation – Overcoming the deadlocks Deadlock COOPERATION How? Capacity- Building Information Sharing Applied Training Stakeholder Involvement Shared Vision Joint Projects Benefit- Sharing Legal and Institutional Frameworks Socio-econ. development River Basin Organisation (RBO)
    19. 19. Main cooperative attempts in the MENA region     ... <ul><li>JWC goal: the implementation of the water clauses of the Peace Treaty </li></ul><ul><li>Continued in functions despite of conflicts between countries </li></ul><ul><li>Several problems to disentangle ambguities embedded in the treaty </li></ul><ul><li>Limited effectiveness </li></ul>Israeli–Jordanian Joint Water Committee (just Israel and Jordan) Currently no donors support projects not licensed through the JWC <ul><li>Goal: rational water resource management and IWRM </li></ul><ul><li>JWC: decisions on water projects in te West Bank by consensus </li></ul><ul><li>Presented as model of cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>Criticism: domination dressed up as cooperation (Israel: Veto & licensing) </li></ul>Israeli–Palestinian Joint Water Committee (just aquifers, not Jordan River) UNESCO, Private Sector, Universities <ul><li>No cooperation at interstate level </li></ul><ul><li>Civil society engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Aims facilitating cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>Goals: Capacity-building and institutional strengthening </li></ul>Euphrates-Tigris Initiative for Cooperation (not governmental, just civil society of 4 riparians) Tigris-Euphrates Basin United States, France, EU, the Netherland, Canada <ul><li>Database project </li></ul><ul><li>Forum whereby infrastructure, research and negotiations are launched </li></ul><ul><li>Small-scale projects (eg wastewater treatment) </li></ul>EXACT (3 riparians) Jordan Basin International Atomic Energy Agency, UNDP, GEF, UNESCO <ul><li>Goal: rational and equitable management of the NSAS </li></ul><ul><li>In the first stages of cooperation (setting) </li></ul><ul><li>Not yet legal and insitutional framework neither projects </li></ul>Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System Project (all 4 riparians) Nubian Aquifer World Bank, UNDP, Denmark, European Commission, France, <ul><li>Old organisation – since 1964 [Failed to prevent environmental catastrophe] </li></ul><ul><li>Goal: regulation and planning of the uses of water and natural resources </li></ul><ul><li>Still focusing primarily in surface water, and not groundwater </li></ul><ul><li>Ambitious project of water diversion from Congo River to Lake Chad </li></ul>Lake Chad Basin Commission (5 riparians) (Algeria, Sudan and Libya not members) Lake Chad World Bank, UNDP, African Devel. Bank, Canada, European Commission, France, US <ul><li>One of the oldest intergovernmental in Africa (Convention signed in 1987) </li></ul><ul><li>Goal: integrated water management and economic developemnt </li></ul><ul><li>Shared Vision and several inestment projects </li></ul><ul><li>Joint basin-wide hydrological monitoring system </li></ul><ul><li>Active nvolvement of donors, but also civil society and environmentalists </li></ul>Niger Basin Authority (9 riparians) (Algeria is not member) Niger World Bank, UNDP, African Development Bank, FAO, GEF, Canada, Denmark, European Commission, Finland, France, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, UK, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, US <ul><li>NBI – provisional cooperative mechanism (since 1999) </li></ul><ul><li>Ambitious goals/ involves all 10 riparians / strong involvement of donors </li></ul><ul><li>Shared Vision and Subsidiary Action programs </li></ul><ul><li>Capacity-building and trust achieved </li></ul><ul><li>Not yet a legal framework or projects on-the-ground </li></ul><ul><li>Nevertheless, seen as a good model of cooperation </li></ul>Nile Basin Initiative (all 10 riparians) Nile Donors Main achievements Initiative Basin
    20. 20. <ul><li>In which Basin/Aquifer would I invest? In those already cooperating, those starting cooperative initiatives, or those displaying no cooperation? And Why? </li></ul><ul><li>In which of these fields of activity (or others) would I engage giving financial support? And Why? </li></ul>EXERCISE 3: If I was a donor… Capacity- Building Information Sharing Applied Training Stakeholder Involvement Shared Vision Joint Projects Benefit- Sharing Legal and Institutional Frameworks
    21. 21. Cooperation is as political as water BASIN/ AQUIFER Multiple stakeholders, positions, decision-making layers, strategies, external actors, ... Multilateral Donor Bilateral Donor Civil Society Riparian C Riparian B Riparian A
    22. 22. Thanks for your attention [email_address]
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.