Regional Newsletter 1/2007


Published on

Water Talk 1/2007

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Regional Newsletter 1/2007

  1. 1. May 2007IWRM National dialogue in Poland Calendar of EventsTHE NATIONAL DIALOGUE WAS HELD ON NO- ter management to overcome potential con- National IWRM Dialogue in SloveniaVEMBER 14, 2006 IN WARSAW BASED MI- flicts of interest among them. April 22, 2007NISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT. Ljubljana, Slovenia During the discussion with participation of Mr. Gajda who was answering several ques- National IWRM Dialogue in Romania tions, the principal issue was how to over- April 25, 2007 come potential conflicts of interest between Bucharest, Romania different agencies and authorities involved inThe seminar was opened by the chair of GWP water management. It’s clear that not all ofPoland, Prof. Janusz Kindler who welcomed them will greet with enthusiasm the changes National IWRM Dialogue in EstoniaMr. Mariusz Gajda, the new Chairman of the considered in the proposal presented. The se- May 9, 2007National Water Management Administration. cond presentation was “Droughts in Poland” Tallinn, EstoniaThe new administrative body, working under concentrating on severe drought that occur-Ministry of Environment, was established ac- red in the summer of 2006. The final presen- National IWRM Dialogue in Moldovacording to updated Polish Water Law on July 1, tation was under the title “Implementation May 14-16, 20072006. In Poland, the Ministry of Environment of EU Water Framework Directive in Poland Chisinau, Moldovadeals with water management policy and the - conditions for success”. The dialogue, hos-strategy. ted by GWP Poland, provided an opportunity National IWRM Dialogue in Czech Republic to discuss openly all difficult issues and dif- May 15-16, 2007Mr. Gajda presented his paper “New gover- ferent opinions. Medlov, Czech Republicnance arrangements for water managementin Poland” which describes new proposal on More than 80 practitioners from all around National IWRM Dialogue in Hungary, phase IIhow to overcome the institutional fragmen- the country attended the dialogue. In additiontation of water management in the country to regular GWP Poland partners, the venue at- May 31, 2007between state government and the self-go- tracted several newcomers as the topic of wa- Szabadkigyos, Hungaryvernment authorities at the local, county and ter management planning is currently on theprovincial levels. The keynote presentation top agenda in Poland. Based on demands of National IWRM Dialogue in Slovakiawas followed by a lively discussion. It came the participants, two more national dialogues June 18, 2007up that the success of water management are slated for early 2007. For more information, Bratislava, Slovakiaplanning largely depends on the will of diffe- please contact Dr. Janusz Kindler, GWP Polandrent agencies and authorities involved in wa- Chair, e-mail: International Tool Box seminar August 30-31, 2007 CREDIT: EWA SKUPISNKA Nyiregyháza, Hungary First GWP CACENA, CEE and MED Inter-regional Partners Meeting Addressing EU Neighbourhood Policy from a water resources management perspec- tive October 6-7, 2007 Varna, Bulgaria GWP CEE Regional Council Meeting October 8-9, 2007 Varna, Bulgaria 6th IWA Conference on Wastewater Recla- mation and Reuse for Sustainability October 9-12, 20072nd phase of the national dialogue in Poland Antwerp, Belgium
  2. 2. Interview with Lucia Ana Varga, State Secretary, RomanianMinistry of the Environment and Sustainable DevelopmentIN CONTINUATION OF OUR SERIES OF INTER-VIEWS WITH THE MINISTERS OF THE ENVIRON-MENT FROM THE 11 CENTRAL AND EASTERN EU-ROPEAN COUNTRIES, WHICH ARE PART OF GWPCEE REGION, WE BRING YOU THE INTERVIEWWITH STATE SECRETARY OF ROMANIAN MINIS-TRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLEDEVELOPMENT, LUCIA ANA VARGA.State Secretary Lucia Ana Varga studied me-chanics at the Technical University of Timi-soara from 1986 to 1991. In 2001 she becamea mechanical engineering candidate for a doc-tor’s degree at the Faculty of Mechanics at thesame university. From 1991 to 1998, Ms. Var-ga was a school teacher in Oradea. Afterwardsshe worked for the Bihor County Commissari-at of the National Environmental Guard as aninspector and chief commissioner until 2005,when she was appointed State Secretary at theMinistry of the Environment and Water Man-agement. During her ministerial career to date,Ms. Varga was elected President of the Bureau the resource - water demand equation and the nating the unitary implementation of actionsof the Meeting of the Parties on the Protocol on fact that water resource protection requires use and measures for the prevention and manage-Water and Health to the 1992 Convention on analysis at the river basin level; ment of specific emergency situations on thethe Protection and Use of Transboundary Wa- ● the integration of flood defense issues with national level;tercourses and International Lakes (2007). In aspects regarding conservation and the devel- ● Directorate for Water Resource Manage-January 2007, she took over the Presidency of opment of aquatic biodiversity; ment, with responsibilities concerning quanti-the International Commission for the Protec- ● the integration of water resources in planning tative and qualitative water management andtion of the Danube River (ICPDR) for one year. policies, taking into account the fact that water is especially concerning European Union aspects,Between 1998 and 2006, she graduated from one of the basic elements of life and at the same the implementation of bilateral and multilateralvarious training courses and seminars on the time a factor which determines socio-economic agreements in the water field and coordinationenvironment, law, communications and public development, is often a limiting factor. of the activities of the transboundary river basinrelations, security and national defense – secu- In the water field, Romania has successfully districts;rity and good governance and internal auditors. managed to cope with nearly all of these IWRM ● Directorate for Dam Safety and Water Ca-She speaks English fluently. Ms. Varga is mem- requirements through both the management dastre, with responsibilities for regulating theber of the Liberal National Party. system and the undertaken and foreseen activi- operational regime of water resources and res- ties aiming to obtain sustainable water devel- ervoirs and regulations on dam safety exploita-1. Water Talk: GWP defines Integrated Water opment. tion, organization, recording and managementResources Management (IWRM) as a proc- In this sense, at the national level, the Minis- of the Water Cadastre of Romania;ess which promotes the coordinated devel- try of the Environment and Water Management ● State Water Inspection with the main re-opment and management of water, land and carries out the policy in the environment and sponsibility for the supervision of the legisla-related resources, in order to maximize the water management fields, the strategy and spe- tion implementation in water field, harmonizedresultant economic and social welfare in an cific regulations for the development and har- with the provisions of the EU water directives.equitable manner without compromising the monization of those activities within the gener- The implementation of the national policy andsustainability of vital ecosystems. How do al government policy, ensures and coordinates strategy in water management, developed byyou see the challenges of IWRM implemen- the application of the Governmental strate- the Ministry is carried out by the “Apele Ro-tation in practice in Romania? gy within the respective fields of activity, thus mane” National Administration, which is or-As it was mentioned, the concept of Integrated achieving the role of state authority, synthesis, ganized on the basin level (11 river basins).Water Resources Management implies: coordination and control. The Water Depart- Its responsibilities are related to quantitative,● the integration of all water categories: sur- ment covers the full area of activities related to qualitative water monitoring, regulation of wa-face water, groundwater, transitional water and water including the following Directorates: ter resources use as well as the implementationcoastal water as well as quantitative, qualitative ● Directorate for the Prevention and Manage- of water management legislation, harmonizedand biological issues of water; ment of Emergency Situations, with responsi- with the EU water directives.● the integration of water use at the river ba- bilities concerning flood protection and control But sustainable water development is not onlysin level, which reveals the need for solving of and hydro-meteorological emergencies, coordi- carried out through activities and technical, in- 2
  3. 3. stitutional and legislative measures but also The estimated costs for the implementation of The main potential beneficiaries of the Struc-through the promotion of the participation of all Drinking Water Directive 98/83/EC are 5.6 mil- tural and Cohesion Funds within the frame-involved actors, as consultative partners in the lion euros, which are needed up to 2015 for: work of SOP are the local public authoritiesdecision making process. In order to create the ● country-wide monitoring of drinking water that at present are beneficiaries of Phare, ISPAmechanisms of consultation on all levels, such quality – new analytical equipment; and other international funds. The preparato-as local collectivities, water users within the river ● investment in equipment for control moni- ry activities for Structural and Cohesion Funds,basins and water management services benefi- toring performed by the producers; which are time consuming for major projects,ciaries; the Basin Committees were established ● improvement of technologies and extension started at the beginning of 2004. Pre-accessionthrough Water Law No. 107/1996 with amend- of water treatment; funds, external grants and bilateral agreementsments. These Basin Committees are organized on ● rehabilitation and extension of the water have been largely used to develop feasibilitythe territorial level within the Water Directorates supply networks; studies and other back-up documents and alsoof “Apele Romane”, as consultative organisms, ● replacement of the domestic distribution to support the activities aimed at improving in-underlining the concern of the Ministry of the systems. stitutional governing with a view to increasingEnvironment and Water Management for sus- The fact that the investments in the water infra- the role of local authorities in project imple-taining the public participation process. The cre- structure are costly is a reality, but it is also true mentation, tendering and contracting.ation of these structures lay at the heart of the that they are absolutely necessary. Within the The providing of grants to the water sector isfollowing main objectives: involvement within strategic approach of the water infrastructure conditioned on the creation of Regional Waterthe decision-making activities of the local ben- projects, Romania has foreseen a long term per- Companies (regional operators). The regionali-eficiaries and efficient cooperation between local spective of the development of the work, taking zation process is essential because in order towater management bodies and local public ad- into consideration both the size of the human implement the environmental aquis require-ministration authorities in order to maintain the agglomerations which generate a huge volume ments, experienced water companies that canbalance of water resource conservation and their of waste water and the financial efforts involved make proper investments and guarantee thesustainable development. in arranging investments in this field. The de- functioning quality of the facilities built are velopment, in time, of the financial efforts al- needed. Without grants, most of the small opera-2. Water talk: Implementation of EU legis- lows for sustainable development of the projects, tors will not be able to comply with the aquis.lation for the new members, which entered which takes into consideration acceptance, both Therefore, there is a strong motivation for dif-the EU at the beginning of 2007, means an of the population and involved institutions. ferent operators to associate in regional wateropportunity for improving the environmen- Therefore Romania has developed a strategic companies with a view to overcoming poten-tal infrastructure with co-financing from EU document titled the Sectoral Operational Pro- tial administrative problems. By promoting in-funds. To which measures in the area of wa- gram for the Environment (SOP) that covers the tegrated water and waste water systems withinter protection, management and use is the period from 2007 to 2013 and supports the ful- a regional approach, Romania aims to maximizesupport from Structural Funds and the Co- fillment of Romania’s obligations in the envi- cost efficiency. Thus, communities from clearlyhesion Fund for the programming period ronmental field, while offering investment op- defined areas (for example from a river basin)2007 – 2013 directed and who might bene- portunities across the country. The SOP strategy are encouraged to join together and developfit from that support? How much funding focuses on collective investments and services a common long term investment program foris needed for improving and developing the necessary to raise long term competitiveness, water sector development (Master Plan for wa-environmental water infrastructure in the create new jobs and obtain sustainable devel- ter/waste water).near future? opment. During the mentioned period, for all Due to the significant investment needed in theDue to the investment needs in water and of the investments in the environmental sec- water infrastructure, within the process of ourwaste water infrastructure – which are eval- tor, Romania is counting on a contribution of EU/IWRM implementation, additional financinguated at almost 15 billion euros – in order to 4.5 billion euros from Structural and Cohesion sources have been foreseen. They include:comply with European legislation, Romania has Funds, an amount that is far below the needs ● The National Program for Rural Develop-requested a longer period of transition (during estimated for the same period. ment, co-financed by the EU for 2007-2013 co-the negotiations with the European Commis- One of the main objectives of the SOP is the im- ordinated by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestssion) than other recent member states, which provement of water quality and access to wa- and Rural Development that includes water in-can allow for the achievement of the invest- ter and the waste water infrastructure based on frastructure investments within the rural areas;ment efforts needed. providing water and water sewerage systems in ● The Governmental Program for InfrastructureThe Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive 91/ urban areas up to 2015. The SOP continues the Development in Rural Zones for 2006 – 2008;271/EEC: implementation requires necessary in- environmental infrastructure development pro- ● The National Environmental Fund, for co-fi-vestments of 9.5 billion euros (5.7 billion euros grams at the national level that have been initi- nancing;for the water treatment plants and 3.8 billion eu- ated within the framework of the pre-accession ● External funds and different forms of Publicros for water sewerage systems) up to 2018 for: assistance, specifically Phare and ISPA. Private Partnerships.● construction of new urban waste water treat- SOP’s priority regarding the extension and mod-ment plants; ernization of the water supply and sewerage 3. Water talk: WFD is the most complex set● up-grading of existing urban waste water systems will be financed through the Cohesion of goals, tools and commitments in the EUtreatment plants; Fund; the financial planning is presented below: water-sector to date. Two of the main WFD● up-grading of existing waste water treat-ment plants in the agro-food industry; EC financing (Euro) National financing (Euro) Total (Euro) Co-financing rate● rehabilitation of existing urban sewage col- Improvement of thelecting systems; water supply 2,776,532,160 489,976,263 3,266,508,423 85%● construction and/or extension of urban sew- and sewerage systemsage collecting systems. 3
  4. 4. goals are the protection and improvement of monized Körös/Crisuri river basin management gen and 66% of the total phosphorous flow-the quality of water ecosystems and sustain- plan in a participative process (French technical ing in dissolved form into the Black Sea comeable, balanced and equitable water use. This and financial support under the coordination of from the Danube river basin. More than half ofdirective provides broad opportunities for ICPDR) with the following expected results: all nutrient loads in the Danube River originatepublic participation in river basin manage- ● Strengthening Hungarian and Romanian co- from agriculture; about one fourth from privatement and is transposed into Romanian legi- operation between transboundary organiza- households and about 10 - 13% from industry.slation. How can the participation of water tions in charge of water management including Romania is the largest contributor of nutrientsstakeholders, the public and NGO’s, be en- public participation; to the Black Sea as its entire territory drains intosured during the implementation of this di- ● Enhancing stakeholder consultation and pre- the Black Sea.rective and especially in preparation of the paring a pilot joint public consultation project Taking into account the above mentioned factsriver basin management plans which must be based on a timetable and a WFD work pro- and also the necessity to comply with EU re-completed by 2009? What do you think? gramme and the main issue in the Körös/Crisuri quirements regarding the mitigation of nitrateThe implementation of WFD requires the co-or- basin (as a pilot project for the Tisa basin/region pollution, the Ministry of the Environment anddination of the all involved parties at the na- consultation) – on going. Water Management has developed the Imple-tional and river basin levels. One of the main 3.“Clean Crisuri” pilot basin project (based on mentation Plan of Nitrates Directive and Actioncomponents of the development of the river ba- two education strategies developed by MoEWM Programs for vulnerable areas. Furthermore, thesin management plans is the public information for children and adults) – on going - that aims Ministry with the support of the World Bank,and consultation process. In order to facilitate at informing people and raising their involve- has carried out the Agricultural Pollution Con-this process and to comply with the provisions ment in elaborating the water protection and trol Project which is aimed at significantly in-of the Water Framework Directive, the Minis- management strategies through: creasing the use of environment friendly agri-try of the Environment and Water Management ● questionnaires; cultural and household practices in rural areashas promoted two ministerial orders for the ap- ● printed information/education booklets/leaf- in order to ultimately reduce the discharge ofproval of: lets; nutrients and other agricultural pollutants● Procedures for public consultation in the de- ● web site ( into the Danube River and Black Sea throughcision making process related to water man- ● public meetings; integrated land and water management. Theagement (Ministerial Order no. 1044/27 October ● education/awareness campaigns. achievements of the project include:2005); Other achievements aimed at public involve- ● Development and implementation of manure● Procedures for public information access re- ment and awareness performed by the Minis- management plans;lated to water management (Ministerial Order try of Environment and Water Management ● Development, revision and dissemination ofno. 1012/19 October 2005). (MoEWM) are: the Code for Good Agricultural Practice;Also the River Basin Committees provide the ● two communication strategy (for kids and ● Development of standard action programsframework for public consultation and partici- adults ) which have been disseminated at the for vulnerable plain areas;pation, including the management plans for all national level, as a framework for local activi- ● Realization of local, regional and national11 river basins elaborated according to the WFD. ties (depending on the local situation); public awareness campaigns;Each committee includes 15 members: water ● 2007 Communication Plan of the MoEWM; ● Testing and proving of ecological agriculturemanagement bodies, representatives of central ● MoEWM website – an important and cost ef- practice within the vulnerable areas.and local authorities, representatives of prefec- ficient tool/“Kids Corner” – ecological education In 2006, implementation at the national leveltures and county councils, users (industry, agri- for children (based on the idea that children are was approved. The extended project amounts toculture, localities) and NGO’s. All of these mem- excellent conveyors of the message); 50 millions euros and has a view to realize thebers are involved in the decision making process ● national TV spots (2 weeks before the events programs and plans established for the vulner-in order to advise the national government, pro- - on 3 channels of Romanian National Televi- able areas identified on the Romania’s territory.mote public participation concerning the river sion) for celebrating: Danube Day (every year,basin management process and to inform the starting from 2004) and International Black Sea 5. Water talk: Global climate changes in theother key stakeholders about public participa- Day (starting from 2006 for public awareness form of flash floods and heavy storms aretion possibilities and structures. on the necessity of the protection and the con- affecting all the countries in the region ofThe following projects have been developed: servation of the marine environment); Central and Eastern Europe. Which arrange-1. Enhancing Access to Information and Pub- ● two national campaigns in 2007 on raising ments and measures, in your opinion, shouldlic Participation in Environmental Decision-ma- public awareness and informing people (1) and be adopted in order to reduce the results ofking UNDP-GEF Danube Regional Project- Com- (2) authorities/industries about the WFD provi- this threat?ponent 3.4 included as activities: sions. The painful experience from 2005 and the● Public Access to water management In- spring of 2006 has shown that the old patternsformation/Public Participation in the decision 4. Water talk: the implementation of EU Di- are no longer valid under the new climate con-making process in water management – a ma- rectives will be an important factor in miti- ditions and that the existing protection work asnual for authorities which has been written es- gating the agricultural impact on the envi- designed is not effective because the environ-pecially for those authorities not involved in ronment; however, it is necessary to involve mental conditions have changed dramatically.water management issues; it was printed under farmers in the practical realization of envi- Also, developments undertaken in the last 50the coordination of the Regional Environment ronmental legislation. What kind of measu- years have had a major influence on these dis-Center and with the support of the Ministry of res for mitigating impacts and enhancing astrous floods and call for necessary solutionsthe Environment and Water Management. environmental benefits are applied in Ro- for the rehabilitation of this situation. There-● Elaboration of a brochure on the same topic mania? fore, Romania is in the process of reshaping andfor the public and NGO’s as target groups. The Black Sea Environmental Program (BSEP) updating existing water management plans and2. Support for the future preparation of a har- Studies revealed that 58% of the total nitro- thus starting to develop a long term strategy for 4
  5. 5. flood control. Romania has also initiated specif- on the Danube will be done through a combina- ● the development of research on the impactic activities in order to enhance its capacity to tion of hydro-technical works and wetlands. of the climate change on water quality.tackle the problem of floods in particular and The results of the research carried out on the As a result, the project “Forward Integration of Floodthe dangerous meteorological phenomena in impact of climate change on water resources Warning in Areas Prone to Flash Floods” funded bygeneral. As a result, the national meteorological involve the consideration of the following as- the WMO and implemented by the GWP – Romaniasystem has been modernized and the hydrolog- pects that should be adopted in order to reduce in partnership with the National Institute for Hy-ical system is in the process of modernization. the consequences of these threats: drology and Water Management, and which was ofIn order to improve the intervention capacity, ● development of new criteria and techniques a great help to us through its educational materialsa large project concerning the improving of in- for the designing of hydraulic structures to in showing the ways of protecting of the population,tervention capacity in the event of floods and make water management systems more sensi- goods and cultural values and the mitigation of theaccidental pollution is in the implementation tive to the modifications of the hydrological re- losses was carried out. As shown in the project re-stage. This project has a total value of about 135 gime, due to the impact of climate variability port, this was made possible through an ensemblemillion euros and also deals with the improve- and climate change; of activities consisting of awareness, warning, pre-ment of reservoir management, particularly in ● elaboration of new procedures for the opera- alarming and alarming, sheltering, evacuation andflood and drought situations. Romania is also tion of water management systems to take into other technical and organizational measures whichdeveloping a study concerning the “Ecological consideration the uncertainty of the hydrologi- the inhabitants are prepared how to use.and economic re-sizing of the Romanian Dan- cal regime evaluation, due especially to climateube Floodplain” based on which flood control change; Water Talk: Thank you for the interview!IWRM National Dialogue in BulgariaTHE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE “ECOLOGICAL ALTERNATIVES FOR INTE- In addition to the plenary sessions, there was also a poster session, groupGRATED WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT” WAS HELD IN ARBANASSI ON discussions and field visits to the villages of Varbitza and Draganovo (Gor-NOVEMBER 23-25, 2006. na Oryahovitsa Municipality). Conclusions At the end of the conference, organizers summarized the results of the group work discussions and field visits and made the following proposals to the central and local authorities: ● development and implementation of a pilot project for IWRM for small settlements. The Gorna Oryahovitsa Municipality and District GovernmentIn Bulgaria, national programs and strategies refer to the construction of a col- would support such a project in the villages of Varbitza and Draganovo.lecting system and WWTPs for agglomerations over 2000 people. All available ● extension of the network of ecosan toilets in rural regions; schoolsfinancial resources for the environment are expected to be directed precisely should be given prioritytowards these agglomerations. However, 4,765 settlements are currently not ● development of cooperation and sponsorship for implementing IWRMcovered by these programs. They include approximately 1.8 million inhabitants, and ecosanitation technologieswhich makes up approximately 24 % of the population. At present, there is no ● organization of regular forums with decision-makers and other stake-single working sustainable sanitation system in the country. holders for supporting the implementation of IWRM and EcoSan ● development of training materials for IWRM concepts and ecosan technolo-To cover this gap, Bulgaria Water Partnership in cooperation with EcoSan- gies for water engineers, vets, foresters, agronomists, etc. and for conductingRes, Earth Forever, Women in Europe for a Common Future, the Institute of training programs for university students, practitioners and other experts.Water Problems-Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, the Regional Inspectorate ● conducting research on the application of ecosan under different natu-of the Environment, Water Veliko Tarnovo and the Yovkovtsi Water Supply ral and socio-economic conditions in Bulgaria& Sewerage Company organized this international conference in Arbanassi M. Mochurovaon November 23-25, 2006. Bulgaria Water Partnership CREDIT: GWP BULGARIAThe aim of this conference was to raise public awareness of water supplyand sanitation problems in small and dispersed communities. It also providedguidance and coordination of actions for optimal ecological solutions forwastewater collection and treatment according to IWRM principles.In total, 44 participants from ministries, municipalities, river basin direc-torates, science and research institutions and universities, NGOs took part.Key note presentations were made by Peter Ridderstolpe (Sweden) – “Na-tural System for Wastewater and Sludge Management with Focus on SmallSettlements in Cold Climates”; Nataliya Gudkova (Ukraine) – “MAMA-86’sExperience in the Introduction of Dry Urine-Diverting Toilets in Ukraine”;Diana Iskreva-Idigo (Bulgaria) “Pilot Ecosan in Rural Bulgaria” and MargrietSamwel&Bistra Mihailova (Germany) “Women in Europe for Common Fu-ture (WECF) Programme in region of Eastern Europe and Caucasus”. IWRM National Dialogue in Bulgaria 5
  6. 6. IWRM National dialogue in Hungary ing local people and the community is need- ed. This will involve new institutional arrange- ments. There must be a high level of autonomy,THE NATIONAL DIALOGUE TOOK PART ON NO- Cities are dominant features in the catchments but this must at the same time be associatedVEMBER 13, 2006 IN BUDAPEST WITH A FOCUS where they occur, and success in IUWM will with transparency and accountability for all de-ON THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT AND IWRM. make important contributions to the theory and cisions. practice of integrated catchment management ● At many levels in the process – even at the and IWRM in the broader basin context. governmental level – stakeholders lack the necessary knowledge and skills for full appli- Taking this into account the Ministry for the En- cation of IWRM. Community stakeholders may vironment and Water together with GWP Hun- not be familiar with the concept of water re- gary decided to organize a national meeting on source management, catchment management,Urban space and IWRM urban environment with special regard to Inte- corporate governance and their role in these.Urban areas play an important role in delivering grated Water Resource Management. ● Where specific areas of responsibility fallthe objectives of the EU Sustainable Develop- outside the mandate of a single governmentment Strategy. In urban areas the environmen- The national dialogue was held on November department, appropriate institutional arrange-tal, economic and social dimensions meet most 13, 2006 with the participation of more than ments are required to ensure effective inter-strongly. Cities are where many environmental 80 stakeholders from different fields such as departmental collaboration. Effective IWRM isproblems are concentrated, but they are also local authorities, ministries, NGOs, universities, a top-down-meets- bottom-up process.the economic drivers, the places where business regional institutions. The opening speech has ● The political will to achieve effective imple-is done and investments are made. Four out of been given by Miklós Persányi - Minister for mentation is indispensable on the part of thosefive European citizens live in urban areas, and the Environment and Water, followed by Gyula taking part - both in the public and private sec-their quality of life is directly influenced by the Hegyi - EP member. From GWP Hungary, Gyula tors.state of the urban environment. Reich gave a presentation on IWRM and urban ● Policies must be meaningful – especially environment. those regarding the poor and marginalized inMost cities are confronted with a common core developing countries.set of environmental problems such as poor Conclusions ● Water management must be prepared withair quality, high levels of traffic and conges- Lively discussions followed and among others, the full involvement of the stakeholders con-tion, high levels of ambient noise, poor-quality the following conclusions were drawn: cerned.building environment, derelict land, greenhouse ● IWRM should be applied at the catchment ● Monitoring of implementation and results isgas emissions, urban sprawl and a generation of level. The catchment is the smallest complete essential - with all stakeholders involved.waste and waste-water. hydrological unit of analysis and management. ● Successful communication includes report- ● It is critical to integrate water and environ- ing to the public on results, as well as listeningLocal authorities have a decisive role in improv- mental management. This principle is widely to the urban environment. The diversity in terms and strongly supported. IWRM can be strength- The main “lesson learned” from this dialogue isof history, geography, climate, administrative and ened through the integration of Environmen- that more meetings and training sessions at thelegal conditions calls for locally developed, tailor- tal Impact Assessments (EIA’s), water resource local level are needed to keep all stakeholdersmade solutions for the urban environment. Ap- modeling and land use planning. better informed.plication of the subsidiary principle, where action ● Full participation by all stakeholders, includ- GWP Hungaryshould be taken at the most effective level also CREDIT: MIKLOS KERESZTESimplies acting at the local level.Many local authorities have expressed the needfor specific skills to adopt an integrated ap-proach to management involving cross-sectorcooperation and training on specific environ-mental legislation, effective public participationand encouraging changes in citizens’ behavior.‘Face to face’ training with the involvement ofnational, regional and local authorities is re-garded by stakeholders as the most valuablelearning method.The fundamental premise is generally accept-ed that IWRM should be applied at catchmentslevel, recognizing catchments or watersheds asthe basic hydrological unit of analysis and mana-gement. At the implementation level, there isa growing conviction that integrated urban wa-ter management (IUWM) could be pursued asa vital component of IWRM within the specificproblematic context of urban areas. Miklos Persanyi, the Minister of Environment, opened IWRM National Dialogue 6
  7. 7. IWRM National dialogue in Ukraine countries, such as France were expressed. The opinion that river basin authorities should be legislative bodies responsible for all aspects of THE UKRAINE WATER PARTNERSHIP (UWP) society, i.e. the ministries of water resources water management and the state of the river AND THE INTERAGENCY COORDINATING (State Committee), finance, economy, forestry, was expressed by some RBOs and NGOs. GROUP FOR DEVELOPMENT OF WATER RE- communal services, justice, the parliamentary SOURCES ORGANIZED THE NATIONAL IWRM committee on the environment, the nine key Representatives from the Ministries of Econo- DIALOGUE IN KIEV ON MARCH 16, 2007. river basins (of which eight are transbound- my and Finance together with parliamentary ary) and the key NGOs (of rivers, environment representatives gave valuable and construc- and social sectors). tive comments on the way forward in imple- menting river basin management. In Ukraine, amendments to the water code are in preparation, and transition to the ba- The meeting was concluded with the adoption Since 2002 the Ukrainian water sector has sin management was proclaimed in 2002. To- of a final resolution which will be presented been in the process of transition to the mana- day the Dniestr river basin serves as a pilot to the Deputy Prime Minister. Participants also gement within hydrographic (basin) bound- basin for integrated river basin management. adopted Joint Statement regarding their views aries. There are, however, different points of The Dnepr, Donets, Western Bugh, Tisza and on ways and means of IWRM implementation view regarding mandates, tasks, functions and other river basins are also involved in this de- in Ukraine. It was proposed that IWRM Imple- the organizational structure of the established velopment. mentation Strategy should become a part of River Basin Organizations (RBO). the recently announced plans to develop new The dialogue was distinguished by its in- National Environmental Strategy and should The river basin management theme brought volvement of river basin managers from re- be included in the new program of coopera- together approximately 50 participants from mote parts of Ukraine. Demands for capaci- tion between EU and Ukraine. almost all relevant sectors and levels of the ty building and learning from more advancedWorld Wetlands Day – Danube wetland work ahead but not enoughDANUBE NGOS (NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS) ARE DOING be most important about wetlands. The result was that most foundGOOD PROJECTS THAT HELP PROTECT AND RESTORE VALUABLE WET- wetlands beneficial for habitat protection, flood control and recrea-LANDS IN THE DANUBE RIVER BASIN. tional purposes (68%), but only 9% found them useful for nutrient pollution control. “The results prove that the case for using wetlands for nutrient pol- lution needs to be better promoted on Wetlands Day and every day,” says Whalley. To better encourage the importance of Danube wet- lands, the DRP is developing a guidance document for wetland mana- gers that includes case studies where wetlands have improved wa-But more wetland projects are needed to make better use of wet- ter quality.lands as pollution removers, says Peter Whalley of the UNDP/GEFDanube Regional Project (DRP). The DRP has also funded numerous wetland pollution-reduction projects implemented by Danube NGOs. Examples include a project‘Wetlands’ are places where water and land naturally cooperate to in Veresegyház, Hungary where local NGO Tavirozsa restocked a lakeprotect water, animals, plants and humans. Besides absorbing pol- with original wetland plants and removed alien fish species that eatlution, wetlands provide numerous other valuable services such as wetland plants -- to reduce the lake’s nutrient pollution problem.reducing the impacts from floods and providing homes for fish andplant species. In Slovakia, the NGO BROZ cooperated with Slovak State Forests to introduce nature-oriented forestry in the 1,500 ha Rusovce flood-Unfortunately, some 80% of the Danube Basin’s wetlands and flood- plain near Bratislava. The new management will remove alien treesplains have been lost due to past human activities over the last 150 and plant native tree species such as elm, oak and wild pear. In ad-years, from river channelling to making room for more farmland. dition, BROZ together with the State Nature Conservancy submitted proposals for three new protected wetland sites of nearly 1,400 ha“Danube countries are missing an excellent opportunity to use wet- along the Danube.lands to reduce water pollution, especially from nutrients,” says Whal-ley. Nutrient pollution is a serious problem in the Danube Basin and In south Moravia, Czech Republic, local NGO Sagittaria prepared andone that countries need to address before they can meet EU water leg- helped implement a new local management plan to increase the ca-islation, the ‘Water Framework Directive’, by 2015. “More attention to pacity of a damaged fish pond. The goal was to naturally reduce ex-wetlands should make meeting this law easier for Danube countries.” cessive nutrient pollution from agriculture and communal sewage. A green buffer strip was set up, fish stocks improved, valuable wetlandA recent survey, funded through the DRP, asked wetland and wa- plants were grown in a special lake enclosure and a public campaignter managers throughout the basin about what they perceived to helped build local support. 7
  8. 8. Water training for international students in BulgariaFROM APRIL 11TH TO APRIL 24TH 2007 ENGREF-MONTPELLIER ORGANIZED a reasonable price for wastewater treatment, taking into account depreci-A TRAINING PROGRAM FOR POST-GRADUATE STUDENTS IN BULGARIA. ation costs. The study also gives short-term recommendations for operat- ing the plant until a sufficient amount of pollution is reached.ENGREF-Montpellier organized the training in association with the Bul-garian Academy of Science, the Bulgaria Water Partnership, the Regional The second case study took place in rural Bulgaria in the Saedinenie Mu-Inspectorate of the Environment and Water in Veliko Tarnovo and UBI- nicipality near Plovdiv. The first aspect was to carry out a technical and fi-FRANCE-Bulgaria nancial analysis of the water supply network, especially to propose some improvements in the supply capacity and energetic yield when necessary CREDIT: ENGREF and to draw up a long term financial sustainability analysis including de- preciation costs. The study also proposed several scenarios to clarify the role of the stakeholders. Furthermore, it presented their views on water prices and opportunities to obtain state funding in the future. The second aspects dealt with sanitation solutions for a village. The pur- pose of the study was to give a methodological framework of different solutions available to reduce the effect of domestic pollution in rural ar- eas and to apply it to Dragomir, a village in the Saedinenie Municipality. The proposed solution could be either individual such as dry toilets that are rather cheap and can be implemented in the short-term, or collective, such as a network and treatment plant with macrophyte reed bed filters, a much more expensive solution but more convenient if tourist develop- ment is being considered.ENGREF team with GWP Consulting Partners in Veliko Tarnovo The case studies were presented at the end of the two-week program inIn France, ENGREF-Montpellier is part of AgroParisTech (Institute of Tech- Sofia during the World Water Day celebrations. The students called fornology for Life, Food and Environmental Sciences) and deals with post- a follow up of the training program in the future that could possibly in-graduation training programs focused on technical and non-technical as- clude young Bulgarian professionals and GWP partners.pects of water management. Guillem CannevaThe students came from France, Moldova, Tunisia, China and Ireland. The canneva@Engref.Frprogram provided a unique opportunity to work on a real case study whileinteracting with Bulgarian professionals, including GWP Bulgaria and theirpartners. 6th IWA Conference on WastewaterThe case studies Reclamation and ReuseThe first case study was the Gorna Oriahovitsa wastewater treatment plant.The treatment plant, financed by an EU grant (75%) and the Bulgarian gov- for Sustainabilityernment (25%), was built to treat wastewater from 102, 000 people. It was THE 6TH INTERNATIONAL IWA SPECIALIST CONFERENCE ON WASTEWA-put into operation in August 2006. Unfortunately, the incoming wastewa- TER RECLAMATION AND REUSE FOR SUSTAINABILITY (WRRS 2007) WILLter is far below what was expected and therefore the treatment plant is BE HELD IN ANTWERP (BELGIUM) ON 9TH-12TH OF OCTOBER, 2007.not working properly. The students were asked to investigate the sourcesof pollution, the operation of the treatment plant and the economic sus- Over the years, this biennial IWA water reuse conference has becometainability of the project. a major global platform to share best practice and discuss the latest de- velopments in the field of sustainable reuse of municipal and industrialThe main results of this study was to recommend that the Gorna Oriaho- wastewater. An appointment not to miss by research institutions, com-vitsa Sugar Factory be connected to the sewage network after installing panies and organisations active in this sector, both in developed anda balancing tank, in order to increase the volume of incoming wastewa- developing countries.ter to bring the treatment plant back to normal operation in the mid-term. More information about the conference is available at, waste water from the Sugar Factory could help maintain Volume 7, Issue No. 1/2007, May 2007 Water Talk is the official newsletter of Global Water Partnership Central and Easter Europe (GWP CEE) published twice a year. Water Talk assists GWP CEE to promote principles of Integrated Water Resourc- es Management (IWRM) in the region of Central and Eastern Europe. The views and opinions expressed in Water Talk do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of GWP CEE. Publisher: GWP CEE - Global Water Partnership Central and Eastern Europe,, Editor: Richard Müller, Language Proofreading: Euro VKM, Ltd, Layout and Printing: TYPOCON, Ltd. Registration No: 3244/2004 ISSN: 1336-5525 GWP CEE – Global Water Partnership Central and Eastern Europe, c/o Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute, Jeseniova 17, 833 15 Bratislava, Slovakia, phone: +421 2 5941 5294, fax: +421 2 5941 5273, e-mail:, http://www.gwpceeforum.org8