Dinara zigashina un wc in the aral sea basin tashkent presentation 11 05 11
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Dinara zigashina un wc in the aral sea basin tashkent presentation 11 05 11

on

  • 4,344 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
4,344
Views on SlideShare
2,097
Embed Views
2,247

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0

9 Embeds 2,247

http://www.dundee.ac.uk 2205
https://wcm.dundee.ac.uk 13
http://wcm-stage.dundee.ac.uk 11
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 7
url_unknown 5
http://wcm-stage 3
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com 1
http://207.46.192.232 1
http://feeds.feedburner.com 1
More...

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Dinara zigashina un wc in the aral sea basin tashkent presentation 11 05 11 Presentation Transcript

  • 1. The role and relevance of the 1997 UNConvention in the Aral Sea BasinDinara Ziganshina Towards the 6th World Water Forum – Cooperative Actions for Water Security,12-13 May 2011, Tashkent, Uzbekistan
  • 2. Outline1. International law2. Comparative analysis of theexisting agreements and 1997 UNWC3. Value added from joining 1997UN WC and its implementation
  • 3. International Law A product of the wills and practices of states (& indirectly other actors) A product of political and social processes An instrument to meet changing ends and value Lacks centralised authority to determine what law is and enforce it Operates in diverse political, economic, social and cultural environment and multi-level governance context  Stability/Predictability - Change/Flexibility  Generality - Specificity  Common values - self-interest  States - other actors  Bilateral, basin, regional, global levelsIHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of UNESCO Slide | 3
  • 4. Treaties at different levels Bilateral agreements Basin agreements Commonwealth of Independent States Agreements UNECE agreements Global agreements  UN 1997 Convention on the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses • 24 contracting states, including Uzbekistan • 11 short of the number required for entry into forceIHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of UNESCO Slide | 4
  • 5. The key elements of legal regime What uses? Scope What waters? Who is entitled to use what water What users? Defines rights & Substantive Rules responsibilities of users Implementation • Procedural Rules Ensures compliance • Institutional mechanisms and accommodates • Dispute changes in avoidance/settlement circumstances Adapted from Wouters, 2009IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of UNESCO Slide | 5
  • 6. Treaties in the ASB, AFG, and CIS 1997 UN WC & UNECE Conventions 1. ScopeDo not include all riparian; Limited  a system of surface waters and groundwaters -scope on groundwater and ecosystem 1997 UN WC, arts 2(a) and 2(b); 1992 UNECE, art 1(1)  ‘ecosystems’ - 1997 UN WC & 1992 UNECE)  ‘drainage basin approach’ - 1997 UN WC, art 1(1) 2. Substantive obligations 2.1. Equitable and reasonable useNo explicit provisions  Detailed provisions – 1997 UN WC  Links with other substantive and procedural rules - 1997 UN WC  Complimentary and residual role to existing agreements
  • 7. Treaties in the ASB, AFG, and CIS 1997 UN WC & UNECE Conventions 2.2. No harmThe existing treaty law  Codified in 1997 UN WC and 1992 UNECEincorporates the no-harm rule.  Details due diligence - 1992 UNECE  Clarity in the legal relationship with ERU which is lacking in the existing legal framework in the basin (1997 UN WC).  Complimentary and residual role 2.3. Protection of international watercourses and their ecosystemThere are provisions to protect  Detailed provisions in 1992 UNECEenvironment but these are mostly  1997 UN WC - Environmentalgeneral. consideration included in ERU and other provisions art 20-23
  • 8. Treaties in the ASB, AFG, and CIS 1997 UN WC & UNECE Conventions 3. Procedural obligations and joint bodies 3.1. Cooperation though joint bodiesEstablish joint bodies their  1992 UNECE spells out the basic tasks ofmandate is weak these bodies 3.2. Regular information exchangePromote rather than ensure the  Stringent terms in 1997 UN WC & 1992 exchange of information. UNECEScope is wide but the content is  A basis for development of a specific sets less specific. of data and information 3.3. ConsultationsNo direct reference to regular  Clear guidelines on consultations on consultations, except 1998 CIS different matters - 1997 UN WC and 1992 TW Agreement UNECE.  Role for river basin commissions – 1992 UNECE
  • 9. Treaties in the ASB, AFG, and CIS 1997 UN WC & UNECE Conventions 3.4 Prior notification on planned measures, reply or absent of replyNo agreed detailed provisions  Sound and detailed procedural framework‘joint consideration’ - 1997 UN WC & Espoo Convention 3.5. Environmental impact assessment Require conduct assessments,  Detailed procedure in Espoo Convention harmonise national EIA  1997 UN WC includes EIA in the package of procedures, and exchange notification documents informationNo detailed procedure on transboundary EIA 3.6. Emergency cooperationThe presence of emergency- 1997 UN WC (art 27-28) complimentary role related obligations is laudable.  a single reference point for emergency in transboundary waters  Links with other obligations
  • 10. Treaties in the ASB, AFG, 1997 UN WC & UNECE Conventions and CIS 4. Compliance reviewNo compliance review  Compliance review and monitoring (e.g. reporting)procedures under Espoo Convention and Aarhus Convention  Institutional mechanisms such as the Meeting of the Parties, Secretariats, Implementation and Compliance Committees, Working Groups) under the UNECE Conventions  Does not exist in 1997 UN WC but can be established by the decision of the parties 5. Dispute settlementNo detailed dispute settlement  A range of means, including an innovative mechanismprocedure of an impartial fact-finding commission - 1997 UN WC  A would-be implementation mechanism under 1992 UNECE Convention
  • 11. Value added from the 1997 UN WC What uses? What Scope waters? What users? SUBSTANTIAL: groundwater, ecosystemsSubstantive Rules Defines rights & SUBSTANTIAL: 1997 responsibilities of users ERU and ecosystem UN WC Implementation • Procedural Rules Ensures compliance and SIGNIFICANT: accommodates changes information, notification, • Institutions & in circumstances consultation, disputes Compliance • Dispute settlementIHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of UNESCO Slide | 11
  • 12. The relationship of the 1997 UN WC withwatercourse agreements 1. Residual 2. Guiding 1997 UN WC does not affect the 1997 UN WC encourages rights and obligations of a watercourse states to harmonise watercourse states arising from watercourse agreements with its existing treaties, unless agreed basic principles, to avoid conflicts - otherwise - art 3(1) art 3(2). 3. Universal framework 4.Protective 1997 UN WC may be applied and 1997 UN WC articulates that rights and obligations of third states, adjusted to the characteristics namely non-participating and uses of a particular watercourse states, shall not be international watercourse or affected by such watercourse part thereof arts 3(3) & 3(5). agreements – art 3(6)IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of UNESCO Slide | 12
  • 13. 1997 UN WC contribution to transboundary cooperation in the Aral Sea Basin1) Increases transparency of 2) Promotes new approaches tointernational law and trust between water management and creates newstates legal norms3) Provides for legal protection 4) Supplements the existing agreements5) Establishes a regime which results 6) Provides a common platform tofrom all of its provisions in negotiate future agreementsconjunction7) Signals the willingness of the 8) Enhances the collective interestcountries to deploy international law dimension of the law onin dealing with water challenges international watercourses9) Enhances the domestic dimension 10) Contributes to the peacefulof water management settlement of disputes
  • 14. Implementation of the 1997 UN WC in the Aral Sea Basin1) Dispel misperception about the 2) Develop a national strategy andConvention action plan3) Conduct an ‘inventory’ of national 4) Enact implementing laws andlegal and institutional frameworks regulation5) Strengthen institutional basis at 6) Strengthen the institutional basisnational and regional levels at the global level7) Build capacity and raise 8) Identify the resources availableawareness at national level and potential barriers to implementation9) Identify potential projects to build 10) Place the 1997 UN WC in anational and regional capacity to broader context of good governanceimplement the 1997 UN WC
  • 15. Conclusions  1997 UN WC can make a contribution to transboundary water cooperation in the Aral Sea Basin  Decisions by individual states to ratify it  Promotion of implementation and compliance  A sense of obligation must be cultivated at the international level and connected into states’ domestic spheres  Lawyers, policy-makers, and scholars can promote norm- internalization – one of the ways to build capacity on IWL University of Dundee: Water Law, Water Leaders www.dundee.ac.uk/water IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science | under the auspices of UNESCO Slide | 15