Michael Campana - From Central American to South Caucus: Water Resources in Developing Countries
From Central America to the South Caucasus:Water Resources in Developing Countries OU WaTER Center/CEES Seminar 28 January 2011 Michael E C Mi h l E. Campana Professor, Department of Geosciences Oregon State University www.geo.oregonstate.edu t t d President, Ann Campana Judge Foundation www.acjfoundation.org President, President AWRA www.awra.org
Talk Organization• I t d ti Introduction: Significant Water Events, Si ifi tW t E t and Hydrophilanthropy• H d Honduras P j t Project• Accomplishments, Mistakes• W t Resources i the South Caucasus Water R in th S th C• Conflict, Water, Gas & Oil• Outcomes & Recommendations• Readings
Significant ‘Water’ Events• 1975: Finished graduate work at U of AZ; began 12+ year career at Desert Research Institute, UN-Reno.• 1989: Left DRI to assume professorship at University of New Mexico.• Mid-1990s: went over to “dark side” - policy, management, etc. Hung out with economists, sociologists, lawyers, et al. S b i l i t l t l Subsequently banned from tl b df many scientific meetings. 1993: Married Mary Frances• Late 1990s: Started focusing on WaSH (water, sanitation, sanitation and hygiene) issues in developing regions regions. Volunteer work with LI and LWI.• 2002: Founded 501(c)(3) - Ann Campana Judge Foundation (www.acjfoundation.org) – funds and ( j g) undertakes water and sanitation projects in Central America• 2006: Rehydration phase: moved to Oregon State University Uni ersit• 2007: Social Media – Blogging, Tweeting, Facebook
Hydrophilanthropy - 1Definition: Altruistic concern for the water, sanitation, andrelated needs of humankind, as , manifested by donations of work, money, work money or resources.
Hydrophilanthropy - 2 Operational definition: p “I can’t define hydrophilanthropy, hydrophilanthropy but I know it when I see it.”(apologies to former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart)
Hydrophilanthropy in Action:H d hil th i A tiWater Resources in Honduras“Be ashamed to die until you have won some victory for humanity.” – Horace humanity ” Mann
Honduras Project j• From 2001-2005, I conducted field course for U of NM Master of Water Resources students in Honduras - three weeks each June. See JCWRE and IMPACT articles.• We worked with Hondureños Alex del Cid Vásquez, Rolando López, and local q p , villagers to build gravity-flow water systems in five villages.• Introduced students to hydrophilanthropy and the struggles of many just to obtain clean drinking water
Five villageslocated in theSierra de Omoa, arugged mountainrange ~20 km NW 20of San Pedro SulaClimate: Warm andhumid with distinctwet and dryseasons. Averageannual rainfall of250 cm (~100inches)
Rural Water ProjectSanta TS t Teresa, Honduras H d WR573 2004
Building the Dam• Ad dam site was cleared above the village at it l d b th ill t ~800 m above sea level, near a spring with an average flow of 100 gallons per minute. g g p• A local mason was hired to build the forms and work with the concrete.• Using only a chainsaw and machete, forms were hand-hewn on site using timber.• S d from the streambed along with nearly Sand f th t b d l ith l 30 bags (1.5 tons) of cement were used.• It took 6 days to build the dam and then 14 days for the concrete to cure.
Tank and Distribution System• We leveled a site above the village for a 5000 gallon water tank and dug a pit for the tank platform• After the tank site was cleared 2 inch diameter cleared, (ID) galvanized iron (GI) pipe was laid between the dam and the tank site• The pipe was provided by S SANAA, the Honduran government agency responsible for rural water supply• The head of rural water for SANAAs northern division inspected the dam and pipeline and was p impressed
Accomplishments• Helped build five gravity-flow potable water systems serving about 2,000 people• Provided instruction to locals in sanitation and hygiene• Cross-cultural, life-changing (for some) experience for 65 students i f t d t• Empowered local women – can do other things besides gathering water; girls can ater go to school• Gringos can be “good neighbors good neighbors”
Shortcomings• No follow-up – Honduran government agency SANAA dropped the ball (no circuit riders)• N d continued training, support Need ti dt i i t• Sustainability and monitoring & evaluation issues (see IMPACT articles by Christine Casey Matute and Stephanie Moore)• Change in social dynamics of g y villages – gender roles. Is this good?
Common Mistakes• Appropriate technology essential• I Involve stakeholders! If we don’t ask for input and l t k h ld ! d ’t k f i t d participation, then there is no “buy in” - “not my well – not my problem – she’ll come back and fix her h well”ll”• Failure to learn from mistakes• Neglecting economic development: people need means to maintain wells, pumps, etc.• Multidisciplinary perspective often lacking• S lf Self-congratulatory, feel-good approach t l t f l d h• Overlooking public health!• Governance, socio-cultural issues, etc. socio cultural
The South Caucasus: A Nice Place to Visit, But… “Handguns are acceptable; semi- automatic weapons must be checked at reception. reception ” -- sign on the door, Metechi Palace Hotel,Tbilisi,Tbilisi Georgia (removed when it became a Sheraton) “He who shoots first, laughs last.”-- Aleksandr Lebed (Boris Yeltsin advisor)
Kura Araks Kura-Araks Basin: Some Facts•Kura Q ddownstream from Araks – mean: 443 m3/ f k /s(15,600 cfs); max: 2,250 m3/s; min: 206 m3/s•Total basin area: 188 200 km2•Basin area in SC countries: 122 200 km2•Kura: 1 360 km Kura: Araks: 1 070 km•Both streams rise in Turkey, join in Azerbaijan, flow to Caspian Sea•No formal agreements among riparians regarding water allocation, quality, ecosystem maintenance
Water Supply and Wastewater - Kura-AraksWastewaterReceives storm water discharge andindustrial and domestic sewage•100% of Armenia s Armenia’s•60% of Georgia’s•50% of Azerbaijan’sWater Supply•None of Armenia’s and Georgia’s drinkingwater,water but provides most water foragricultural production and industry •Provides over 50% of Azerbaijan’s drinking d i ki water and 60% of it water f t d f its t for agricultural production
Transnational River Basin – Water Problems•Water resource problems could threaten thestability of the region.•Azerbaijan is especially vulnerable as it is farthestdownstream and relies on the Kura Araks for over Kura-Araks50% of its drinking water and about 60% of itswater for agricultural production. It is energy-rich. energy rich.•Kura-Araks discharges into Caspian Sea; Azerbaijanis often blamed for pollution contributed by all three.
South Caucasus River Monitoring Project NATO Science for Peace Programme (1 November 2002 – 31 December 2008) Partner Country Project Director (PPD) Prof. Prof Nodar Kekelidze, Georgia Kekelidze Partner Country Co-Directors Dr. Armen Saghatelyan, Armenia g y , Dr. Bahruz Suleymanov, AzerbaijanNATO Project Director (NPD) Prof. Michael E. Campana, USA P f Mi h l E CNATO Project Co-Directors Prof. Freddy Adams, Belgium Prof. Eiliv Steinnes, Norway
Project Goal Technical cooperation will “diffuse upward” into thehighest levels of government in the three republics, leading to peace and stability (anduninterrupted flows of gas and oil! – my cynical comment) y y
Project Overall Objective O erall Objecti e To build trust and establish the social and technical bases for a transboundary,cooperative,cooperative and transparent water resourcesmanagement agreement among the Republics of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. The agreement will cover water quantity and quality and stream ecosystem maintenance. Bottom-up project! (http://www.kura-araks-natosfp.org) (http://www kura araks natosfp org)
Sources of Conflict (Ethnic and Other Factors)• ‘Autonomous’ (‘breakaway’) republics – South Ossetia, Abkhazia (Georgia)•Nagorno-Karabakh [Ar-Az]•Javakheti (Georgia-Armenia)•Bak Tbilisi Ce han (oil) and Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum (gas) pipelines (terrorist targets?)
Contributing Factors to Conflict•C Corruption ti•Internal strife (distribution of wealth, desire f d i for autonomy, etc.) t t )•Deteriorating water quality•R d ti in water supply (whether Reduction i t l ( h th anthropogenic, climate-induced, etc.)•E Economic conditions i diti•Hegemony (Russian Federation, USA, EU) – th new “G t G the “Great Game””
Water Reso rce Problems Resource•Water quantity•Water quality q y•Ecosystem degradation•Effects of climate change Effects•Poor management and regulation•Infrastructure decrepit or lacking
Water Quality - Pollution• Sediments from erosion due to deforestation and land-use practices• Heavy metals from mining and industry• Discharge of untreated sewage and industrial waste• Nitrogen, phosphorus from agriculture• Pathogenic organisms• Radionuclides• POPs – Persistent Organic Pollutants (pesticides, etc.)
DDT and Related Compounds – pConcentrations in Caspian Sea Sediments (pg/g)Compound Mean Max Std.DDT 812 7,400 4,770DDE , 659 1,300 1,220 ,DDD 866 3,400 2,070Petro. HCs -- 1,820 , 500
So What s The Bottom Line? What’s•Project promoted and developed stronger technical tiesamong professional colleagues gp g•Government agencies were involved as end users, but nocivil society representation•Political situation among the countries made it impossible tomeet with all end users at once t ith ll d t•Unsure project has improved intergovernmental relations p j p g•Significance for NATO – first funded environmental project•Better characterization of Kura-Araks water quality
Recommendations•Establish committee to coordinate various projects•Form basin commission to provide water resources coordination; involve Turkey and Iran ; y•Develop “shared vision” model•Update country water codes, allowing for changes in li h f i light of new information/changing conditions. i f i / h i di i Manage water quantity, water quality, land use, and ecosystem health simultaneously•Stakeholder involvement – watershed councils•Continue to address “non-water” problems that Continue non water could lead to conflict
The Region s Future? Region’s“The optimist learns English.The pessimist learns Chinese Chinese. The realist learns Kalashnikov.” -- Armenian colleague
Honduras & HP R di H d Readings 1) September 2010 Water Resources IMPACT (http://bit.ly/9ColgZ)2) August 2010 J. of Contemporary Water Research and Education W R h d Ed i (http://bit.ly/gxwh5h)3) ‘Hydrophilanthropy’ category at:aquadoc.typepad.com/waterwired d t d / t i d
South Caucasus Readings gVan Harten, M. 2002. Europe’s troubled waters. A role for the OSCE: the caseof the Kura-Araks. Helsinki Monitor, 13(4): 338-349.Ewing, Amy, 2003. Water Quality and Public Health Monitoring of SurfaceWaters in the Kura-Araks River Basin of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.Publication No. WRP-8, Water Resources Program, University of New Mexico,Albuquerque, NMVener, Berrin Basak, 2006. The Kura-Araks Basin: Common Objectives and Kura-Obstacles for an Integrated Water Resources Management Model amongArmenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. Master’s Professional Project, WaterResources Program, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM.Vener, Berrin Basak and Michael E. Campana, 2010. C fli and cooperation inV B i B k d Mi h l E C Conflict d i ithe South Caucasus: the Kura-Araks Basin of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. Kura-In M. Arsel and M. Spoor (eds.), Water, Environmental Security and SustainableRural Development: Conflict and Cooperation in Central Eurasia. Oxford, UK:Routledge, pp. 144-174. [http://bit.ly/a6kDZY] 144-
Thank You! WaterWired blog: http://aquadoc.typepad.com/waterwired WaterWired Twitter: http://twitter.com/waterwired http://twitter com/waterwired AWRA: http://www.awra.org"We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.” – Winston Churchill