At the end, add: GWP acts as a facilitator for knowledge sharing.
GWP is also, as the name implies, a partnership . It has over 2,000 partners – water experts, development banks and agencies, government institutions, private companies, professional associations, non-government organizations, academic and research institutions, and others. The partners are committed to the Dublin-Rio principles and to manage water resources aiming at a fair balance of economic efficiency, social equity and ecosystem sustainability. GWP is also a network of Regional Water Partnerships (13) and Country Water Partnerships (currently 73). The Secretariat is located in Stockholm, Sweden. There are network officers to liaise with the RWPs and CWPs. One of the RWPs is for South East Asia.
For example, more coordinated development and management of: land and water, surface water and ground water, upstream and downstream interests .
Different uses of water are interdependent. Integrated management means that all the different uses are considered together.
[1 click - “and scales.” + pyramid on your click] Scales aspect of IWRM is often forgotten. But it is necessary in order to: Put into practice the 2 nd Dublin Principle: Water development and management should be based on a participatory approach, involving users, planners and policy-makers at all levels. Achieve more efficient use of limited water resources Ensure decision-making is taking place at the lowest appropriate level. And that decisions made at local and river-basin levels are in-line with, or at least do not conflict with, the achievement of broader national objectives, and in turn, that national objectives reflect local needs. In some countries means more decentralized decision-making. E.g. In Thailand, where IWRM approach used to improve the responsiveness of water management to local conditions and to resolve conflicts that had arisen during phase of centralized water management. In others, means bumping some types of decisions up to the river basin or national level – for example decisions on water allocation frameworks.
Centralized in national government – little or no role for local governments and affected communities Fragmented institutionally – each agency does its thing, for its own sector or level Fragmented spatially – political boundaries at local and national levels Sectoral management of water quantity and quality – hydropower, water supply, irrigation, fishing concerns taken separately. Decisions made by one sector do not consider impacts of that decision on other sectors. EX. Dams for hydropower have effect on fish. Sudden release of water from dams causes flash floods. Project focused – Participatory at all levels – involves local government and affected communities in decision-making, disaster preparedness, etc. Institutionalized cooperation/collaboration among different stakeholders – national and local governments, NGOs and people’s organizations, academe, private sector… Collaborative across boundaries, within river basin
Water is becoming scarcer and its economic value is rising. Recognition that costs should be borne by those who benefit.
GWP & IWRM
The Global Water Partnership (GWP) and Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) Dr. Ma. Cecilia G. Soriano GWP-SEA ToolBox Hub
Mission: <ul><li>Founded in 1996 by the World Bank, UNDP and Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) to support the sustainable development and management of water resources at all levels. </li></ul><ul><li>Working with multiple stakeholders, GWP identifies critical knowledge needs at global, regional and national levels, and facilitates the sharing of that knowledge so that policy makers and development decision makers will pursue an integrated approach to water resources management. </li></ul>
13 Regional Water Partnerships 73 Country Water Partnerships 2,069 Partners in 149 countries A growing international network since 1996
Vision: <ul><li>Sufficient clean water for all life – human society and ecosystems </li></ul><ul><li>Security for all the economic sectors which consume or harness water - agriculture, energy, industry, domestic water supply, tourism . . . </li></ul><ul><li>Security from droughts, floods, landslides, water-borne diseases – all the negative aspects of water </li></ul><ul><li>Improved quality of life, health and well-being for the most vulnerable groups in society </li></ul>a water secure world
<ul><li>Water is a critical, but often overlooked element in sustainable development. If effective, long lasting solutions to water problems are to be found, a new water governance and management paradigm is required. Such a new paradigm is encapsulated in the Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) concept, which has been defined by GWP as … </li></ul>
INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IWRM) <ul><li>‘ a process which promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources in order to maximize the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital eco-systems’. </li></ul>
IWRM <ul><li>explicitly challenges conventional, fractional water development and management systems and places emphasis on an integrated approach with more coordinated decision making across sectors and scales. It recognizes that exclusively top-down, supply-led, technically-based and sectoral approaches to water management are imposing unsustainably high economic, social and ecological costs on human societies and on the natural environment. Business as usual is neither environmentally sustainable, nor is it sustainable in financial and social terms. </li></ul>
Managing competing uses Water for people Water for food Water for nature Water for other uses Cross-sectoral integration <ul><li>Enabling environment </li></ul><ul><li>Institutions </li></ul><ul><li>Management </li></ul><ul><li>instruments </li></ul>
Integrating across levels and sectors National Basin Local Fisheries Environment Tourism Industry Finance Agriculture Energy Water
Multi-level Comprehensive Governance Local, Regional, National, Fluvial, Global Ancient 1200 A.D. 1900 1990s Future Community Basic management of water quantity Sectoral management of water quantity and quality institutional fragmentation spatial fragmentation local co-ordination Integrated multifunctional use river basin as unit institutionalised cooperation
<ul><li>IWRM </li></ul><ul><li>Participatory at all levels </li></ul><ul><li>Collaborative </li></ul><ul><li>Multi-sectoral </li></ul><ul><li>Continuing and integrated </li></ul><ul><li>Whole water cycle </li></ul><ul><li>TRADITIONAL </li></ul><ul><li>Centralized in </li></ul><ul><li>nat’l government </li></ul><ul><li>Fragmented </li></ul><ul><li>Sectoral </li></ul><ul><li>Project focused </li></ul>
Flood Control vs. Management <ul><li>To live with flooding (recognize its benefits to agriculture and environment and minimize losses) </li></ul><ul><li>Respect floodplains (relocate people) and waterways </li></ul><ul><li>Prepare local governments and communities for floods </li></ul><ul><li>Proper SWM , reforestation </li></ul><ul><li>Multi-purpose structures: drainage and sewerage, SMART Tunnel in Malaysia, Marina Barrage in Singapore </li></ul><ul><li>To prevent flooding </li></ul><ul><li>Infrastructure (dams, dikes and levees) </li></ul><ul><li>Can protect people living in hazardous areas </li></ul><ul><li>People not prepared when floods come </li></ul>
Negotiating differences <ul><li>All of this implies change, which brings threats as well as opportunities. There are threats to people’s power and position; and threats to their sense of themselves as professionals. </li></ul><ul><li>IWRM requires that platforms be developed to allow very different stakeholders, often with apparently irreconcilable differences, to somehow work together. </li></ul>
Undertaking reforms <ul><li>Because of the existing institutional and legislative frameworks, implementing IWRM is likely to require reform at all stages in the water planning and management cycle. </li></ul><ul><li>An overall plan is required: a new water policy, reform of water-related laws and institutions </li></ul><ul><li>Hard decisions have to be made… </li></ul>
… Step-by-step <ul><li>As a process of change which seeks to shift water development and management systems from their currently unsustainable forms, IWRM has no fixed beginnings and will probably never end. The global economy and society are dynamic. The natural environment is also subject to change. IWRM systems need to be responsive to change and be capable of adapting to new economic, social and environmental conditions and to changing human values. </li></ul>
IWRM <ul><li>is not an end in itself but a means of achieving three key strategic objectives: </li></ul><ul><li>efficiency to make limited water resources go as far as possible </li></ul><ul><li>equity in the allocation of water across different social and economic groups (and present and future generations) </li></ul><ul><li>ecological sustainability , to protect the water resources base and associated eco-systems </li></ul>
工具的构成 A: Rules created by legislation, policy and financing structures B: Roles of agencies, utilities, RB authorities, regulators & other stakeholders C: Management practices
Three pillars of IWRM <ul><li>Moving towards enabling environment of appropriate policies, strategies and legislation </li></ul><ul><li>Putting in place the institutional framework (through which policies can be implemented) </li></ul><ul><li>Setting up the management instruments required by these institutions to do their job </li></ul>
IWRM PRINCIPLES <ul><li>Fresh water is a finite and vulnerable resource, essential to sustain life, development and the environment. </li></ul><ul><li>Water development and management should be based on a participatory approach, involving users, planners and policymakers at all levels. </li></ul><ul><li>Women play a central part in the provision, management and safe-guarding of water. </li></ul><ul><li>Water has an economic value in all its competing uses and should be recognized as an economic good as well as social good. </li></ul>Dublin, 1992
Observations: <ul><li>Need a guide to the steps in the reform process/how to apply IWRM principles </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What are needed in the reform process? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How can these be put in place? By whom? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Need to learn from IWRM experiences </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How can we learn from our experiences? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>By reflection, writing about it. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How can we learn from others? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>By sharing lessons learned – face-to-face, on-line </li></ul></ul>
Lessons from IWRM in practice <ul><li>IWRM is a means not an end. None of the successful case studies analysed set out to achieve IWRM. Rather they set out to solve particular water-related problems or achieve development goals by looking at water holistically within larger physical and development contexts. </li></ul>IWRM Equity Sustainability Efficiency
Acknowledgements <ul><li>Ms. Danka Thalmeinerova, GWP ToolBox Officer </li></ul><ul><li>Ms. Mercy Dikito-Wachtmeister, GWP Network Officer for South East Asia </li></ul><ul><li>Ms. Yolanda Gomez, Philippine Water Partnership </li></ul>