Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Regional Newsletter 1/2008


Published on

Water Talk 1/2008

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Regional Newsletter 1/2008

  1. 1. Editorial Calendar of Events At the World Summit on Sustainable Develop- National IWRM Policy Dialogues build on the ment in 2002, the international community called success of previous dialogues and more im- Global Environmental Change on countries to prepare IWRM and Water Effi- portantly, they add a strong partnership ele- May 19-21, 2008 ciency Plans by 2005. Since then, the Global Wa- ment as they were initiated by Water Partner- Sofia, Bulgaria ter Partnership has offered substantial support to ships and GWP Consulting Partners. GWP ToolBox training workshop countries that are trying to meet that call. June 6, 2008 The Dialogues are also well timed to contribute Chisinau, Moldova One of the ways, central to the GWP, is to to reporting on the progress of IWRM Plans and bring stakeholders together to discuss more Water Efficiency Plans at the CSD-16, slated for Danube Day integrated approaches to water management. 2008, which is indeed a unique opportunity to June 29, 2008 Since its establishment in 1996, the GWP has raise awareness and galvanize political will. Countries of the Danube River basin organized several thematic dialogues on glo- bal, regional and national and local levels. The In addition, you will find more news from GWP NeWater-GWSP Summer School results were synthesized and presented at Partners, a review of the most recent publica- July 9-19, 2008 Konigswinter, Germany World Water Forums in The Hague and Kyoto. tions, upcoming events and much more. World Water Week in Stockholm Progress and Prospects on Water: For aFlood Management Guidance Clean and Healthy World August 17-23, 2008NEW BOOK SUMMARIZES RECENT FLASH FLOOD The book includes experiences from the 3 na- Stockholm, SwedenEXPERIENCE FROM CENTRAL AND EASTERN tional pilot second-phase flash flood projectsEUROPE. and practical recommendations for reducing The International Water Association (IWA) the devastating impact of flash floods. It targets 11th International Specialised Conference decision makers in national administrations, re- on Watershed and River Basin Conference searchers and operational managers in the Na- September 4-5, 2008 Budapest, Hungary Guidance o tional Meteorological and Hydrological Services, n Flash Manageme Flood mayors and local decision makers. Dniester River Conference nt October 2-3, 2008 To view and download the book in PDF form, Chisinau, Moldova please visit CREDIT: RICHARD MULLER/GWP CEE Recent Expe from Central riences and Eastern EuropeOne of the outcomes of the regional workshopentitled, “Community Preparedness and Pub-lic Participation for Flash Flood Managementin Europe”, was the finalization of a book en-titled “Working towards Flash Flood Manage-ment Strategy Preparation” by the World Mete-orological Organisation, GWP CEE, GWP Polandand the Institute of Meteorology and WaterManagement of Poland. Mountainous areas, particularly near the mouth of the foothill canyons, are prone to flash flooding
  2. 2. National dialogue in Lithuania: river basin managementin the IWRM contextTHE MAIN GOAL OF THE DIALOGUE WAS TO DIS- stitute of Geology and Geography. The event was other institutions. The National Commission forCUSS OPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES OF RIV- attended by 146 participants from various insti- Sustainable Development also reports to the UNER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND SUS- tutions. GWP Lithuania made a presentation en- Commission for Sustainable Development andTAINABLE WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. titled “IWRM in a Year of Planet Earth” before an other international organizations on the progress audience which had not been very involved in ei- in sustainable development. ther water resource management or implemen- tation of the Water Framework Directive. At the World Summit for Sustainable Develop- ment in 2002, Lithuania adopted the Johannes- As to the outcomes of the dialogue, GWP Lithua- burg Declaration on Sustainable Development. nia has signed a long term agreement with the The Declaration underlines the fact that sus-The dialogue comprised two seminars. The first Ministry of Environment to act as the Informa- tainable development requires a long-term per-seminar was held on November 28, 2006 and at- tion Centre on River Basin Management. Ac- spective and broad-based participation in policytracted 95 representatives of the Ministry of Envi- cording to Bernardas Paukstys, GWP Lithua- formulation, decision-making and implementa-ronment, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry nia Director, “this will be a great opportunity tion at all levels. The signatory countries alsoof Health and the Ministry of Economy, municipal- to provide a neutral platform for water stake- committed themselves to monitor progress to-ities, Regional Environmental Departments, River holders and disseminate IWRM information.” wards the achievement of sustainable develop-Basin District Coordination Boards, NGOs, profes- GWP Lithuania has been active in the coun- ment objectives on a regular basis.sional associations and private companies. try since 2000 and therefore, the IWRM is not a new concept for governmental agencies and Shortly after the Johannesburg Summit, Lithua-The presentations covered the entire range of NGOs. The IWRM is well embedded in the Water nia prepared the National Strategy for Sustaina-water management issues, including the inte- Law and its regulations as well as the National ble Development which was adopted by the Gov-gration of territorial planning and water man- Strategy for Sustainable Development. Howev- ernment in September 2003. One of the mainagement; the environmental, economic and er, bringing the IWRM to a wider audience, such goals is a change of the water governance struc-social aspects of river basin planning and the as schools and experts outside the water field ture in line with international commitments (therole of coordination boards; river basin man- remains a key challenge for the future. IWRM) and the requirements of the Europeanagement and the IWRM and possible conflicts Union (the river basin management principle).between the Water Framework Directive and SUSTAINABLE WATER RESOURCE However, even though the IWRM and the basicagriculture. The participants appreciated the MANAGEMENT principles of sustainable water resources man-presentation entitled, “The EU Water Frame- In 2000, the National Commission for Sustain- agement are explicitly mentioned in official poli-work Directive as the IWRM in the North” on able Development was established to formulate cies, plans and strategies, the IWRM has not yetthe similarities between the Water Framework sustainable development policies and coordinate been fully implemented in practice.Directive and the IWRM, based on the presenta- the preparation and implementation of projectstion of Henrik Larsen and Torkil Jonch-Clausen in this field by ministries, government bodies and On the national level, the Ministry of Environ-from DHI Water & Environment. CREDIT: SIGITAS KALVAITISCurrently, as the discussion pointed out, the im-plementation of the Water Framework Directive isthe most important, legally binding task of gov-ernmental institutions in Lithuania. To some ex-tent, IWRM planning and river basin managementplans overlap. This has led to the conclusion thatthe implementation of the Water Framework Di-rective in Northern Europe, which is abundantwith surface and ground water, can be consid-ered as the implementation of the IWRM. Officialsof the Ministry of Environment wanted to findout whether this was also the GWP position andwhether they could report on the IWRM to theUnited Nations using progress in the implementa-tion of the Water Framework Directive. However,municipalities could not clearly distinguish thesetwo concepts and were confused by the necessityof their simultaneous implementation.The second seminar was held on December 1,2006 on the occasion of the Annual Assemblyof the Lithuanian Geological Society in the In- New Year canoe trip on the Merkys River, Lithuania 2
  3. 3. ment is responsible for the implementation of ter monitoring, however, it has an impact on the collection and treatment of sewage and dis-the National Strategy for Sustainable Develop- quality of water by managing agricultural prac- charge of sewage effluents, setting prices forment and reporting to the National Commission tices, preventing pollution from diffuse sourc- the drinking water supply, collection of sewagefor Sustainable Development. es and maintenance of the drainage network. and by approving permits for the discharge of The Ministry of Health plays an important role effluents to sewers.WATER GOVERNANCE: A NEED FOR COOR- with respect to human health and water. It isDINATION AND INTEGRATION responsible for the sanitary control and elabo- RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLANNINGSimilar to other countries in the region, there ration of standards of all drinking water and of After joining the European Union in 2004,are three levels of water management in Lithua- recreational water bodies (bathing water). The changes in policy and water governance helpednia – the national, regional and local (munici- Ministry of Transport is in charge of navigation, to introduce IWRM principles and facilitatedpal) levels. However, it is obvious that the wa- and plays a role on river management, regula- the Water Framework Directive implementation.ter management system is too complicated and tion and surveillance of inland waterways. Even Lithuania has designated the following four riv-rather difficult to coordinate. though the Ministry of Interior is not directly er basin districts: Nemunas, Lielupe, Venta and involved in water management, its Civil Security Daugava. However, water management institu-NATIONAL LEVEL Department deals with the prevention of the ef- tions in Lithuania are established according toIn Lithuania, the Ministry of Environment is the fects of extreme weather events and the reme- administrative borders and do not reflect natu-main governmental body responsible for water diation of accidents. ral river basin through a network of its agencies,departments, and services. Implementation of REGIONAL LEVEL Nowadays, the main concern of the nationalthe Water Framework Directive is in the hands Counties represent the higher level state admin- water policy is the implementation of the Wa-of the Environmental Protection Agency, which istration in Lithuania. The Government appoints ter Framework Directive and other EU water di-was created in 2003. The Marine Research Cen- the Governor of the County. The Governor con- rectives. Although the main EU water directivestre deals with the Baltic Sea and the Curonian trols, among others, the management of water are already transposed into the national legis-Lagoon environment, including the monitoring bodies, and protection strips and zones around lation (Urban Waste Water Treatment, Danger-of surface waters and wastewater in western water bodies. On the regional level, ten Coun- ous Substances, Nitrates, Fish Water, DrinkingLithuania. Across the country, the Hydrom- ties share the responsibility for water manage- Water, Bathing Water Directive, etc.), the imple-eteorological Service is in charge of hydrom- ment. In addition to Counties, the Regional De- mentation of the directives continue to requireeteorological observations. The Protected Ar- partments of Environmental Protection, located considerable effort on all levels.eas Department manages protected areas and in eight regional centers, are responsible for thethe Geological Survey monitors and protects enforcement of environmental legislation and Implementation of Water Framework Directivegroundwater resources. implementation of the environmental policy on and river basin management planning is often the regional level. confused with the IWRM. Sometimes there is aThe Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of misinterpretation of the IWRM and river basinHealth, the Ministry of Transport and the Minis- LOCAL LEVEL management concepts even among water pro-try of Interior also deal with water issues on the Currently at the local level 60 municipalities fessionals. For this reason, GWP Lithuania willnational level. The Ministry of Agriculture is not participate in water management by being re- continue with the National IWRM Dialogue se-directly involved in water management and wa- sponsible for the drinking water supply and the ries in the future.National dialogue in Romania: finding the gapGWP ROMANIA, THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRON- search institutes (ICIM, INHGA, ISPIF), the Na- after the country joined the European Union inMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND tional Committee for Emergency Situations, 2007 and the IWRM.“APELE ROMANE” THE NATIONAL RESEARCH NGOs (CCE Galati, REC- Romania, WWF-Roma-AND DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE FOR PROTEC- nia) and professional Associations (ARA) dis- In her introduction to the book “Romanian Wa-TION OF THE ENVIRONMENT, ORGANIZED A NA- cussed challenges and opportunities related to ter: A Perspective Vision in Light of theEU WaterTIONAL DIALOGUE IN BUCHAREST ON APRIL 25, the IWRM and the EU Water Framework Direc- Framework Directive and Integrated Water Re-2007. tive. In Romania, current fast economic growth source Management” which was launched dur- poses a certain threat to sustainable water de- ing the meeting, Lucia Ana Varga, State Secretary velopment, management and use with the eco- of the Ministry of Environment and Sustaina- nomic sector competing with society and the ble Development and the Romanian President environment for the same precious resources. of ICPDR in 2007, said “Water issues are com- plex and they are difficult and costly to solve.More than 40 participants including govern- The main topic of the dialogue was “IWRM Im- We simply cannot solve ’historical’ problems inmental officials (the Ministry of Environment plementation: Comparison, Achievements and one or two years. However, we must meet theand Sustainable Development, the Ministry of Needs versus EU Water Related Directives”. Al- 2015 deadline for full compliance with EU wa-Education, the Ministry of Agriculture and the though the Romania water management sys- ter standards, starting from the Danube’s springMinistry of Internal Affairs), the “Apele Ro- tem is historically based on the river basin lev- water to its discharge into the Black Sea”.mane” (“Romanian Water”) National Admin- el, there is still some misunderstanding betweenistration with its river basin departments, the the relatively new concept of river basin man- The importance of the meeting was underlinedNational Environmental Protection Agency, re- agement planning introduced by the EU WFD by the fact that countries have to report on the 3
  4. 4. IWRM and Water Efficiency Plans preparation DIALOGUE OUTCOMES creation of cross-sectoral working groups toat the 16th session of the UN Commission on As stated above, one of the dialogue outcomes analyze aspects covered by the IWRM but lack-Sustainable Development in 2008. The reports was the brochure entitled, “Romanian Water: ing in existing water management policies. Thesubmitted for the first time in 2005 and then A Perspective Vision in Light of the EU Water identified gaps will then be included into riverin 2008 showed outcomes achieved to date and Framework Directive and Integrated Water Re- basin management plans and other key plan-commitments assumed by the countries that source Management” produced by GWP Ro- ning documents, such as landscape plans.participated in the Johannesburg World Sum- mania in cooperation with the “Apele Romane”mit for Sustainable Development in 2002. National Administration and the Ministry of En- WATER GOVERNANCE IN ROMANIA vironment and Sustainable Development. The In Romania, the Ministry of Environment andThe dialogue helped decision makers to discuss brochure was published in Romanian and Eng- Sustainable Development is in charge of naturedifferences between two inter-related issues – lish. The primary target groups are non-water protection and water management policies andthe IWRM and the EU Water Framework Direc- professionals, including the media, universities legislation. Implementation of the policies on thetive and to identify gaps which could then be and decision makers in central and local gov- national, regional and local levels is in the handsaddressed by GWP Romania and its consult- ernments. of the Agency for Environmental Protection anding partners. An example of this is the provi- the Apele Romane National Administration. Bothsion of sanitation services which addresses In addition, participants adopted a Common institutions cooperate with other agencies whichonly settlements over 2000 people and there- Declaration which was then submitted to the work under the Ministries of Economy, Agricul-fore leaves thousands of citizens without prop- Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Devel- ture, Health, Education and water treatment. The presentations included opment, the Romanian Water Director, heads ofcase studies from the Danube River basin level the “Apele Romane” National Water Administra- The Apele Romane National Administrationin the trans-boundary context as well as experi- tion and other ministry representatives present deals with water management operational is-ences from national sub-basins. at the dialogue. The Declaration calls for the sues, the development of a new water infra- National dialogue in Estonia: the need for cross sectoral cooperation GWP ESTONIA ORGANIZED AN IWRM DIA- ganize a discussion about the methodology of cies and experts, were set up in each sub-basin LOGUE, FOCUSED ON RIVER BASIN PLANNING, assessing the efficiency of water protection to prepare management plans. Representatives ON MAY 9, 2007 IN TALLINN. measures. According to Liiv, “both institutions of stakeholders and experts are also invited to have acknowledged that the river basin man- working group meetings. More than 50 participants, including govern- agement plans should be in compliance with mental officials, regional and local administra- IWRM principles”. THE NEED FOR CROSS SECTORAL tors, water stakeholders and non-governmental COOPERATION organizations, discussed river basin manage- As the compilation of water management plans ment planning in Estonia from IWRM and EU started quite recently, it is inevitable that leg- Water Framework Directive perspectives. The islation adopted years ago and within the ju- topics covered by the dialogue included river risdiction of other ministries does not include basin planning governance, cross sectoral co- requirements for consistency with water man- operation, the role of local governments and RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLANNING agement plans. To improve the situation in the water pricing. The discussion showed that the SET UP future, the Ministry of the Environment will re- Water Framework Directive covers most IWRM In the future, the Water Framework Directive quest the addition of relevant provisions when principles. However, there are still challenges sets the stage for the organization and plan- harmonizing related acts and regulations. concerning planning, agriculture, hydro-power ning of Estonian water resource management. constructions and other sectors. The Commission on Water Resource Manage- As a result of rapid development in Estonia, it ment, working under Ministry of the Environ- has been difficult to coordinate and harmonize One of the outcomes, says Harry Liiv, the Dep- ment, supervises and assists with river basin water management plans and different water uty Secretary General of the Ministry of En- management planning. In addition to Minis- projects on the national, regional and local lev- vironment, was that “the Estonian report on try of the Environment officials, it also includes els. During recent years the population in the Millennium Development Goals, submitted representatives of the Ministry of Agriculture, suburbs around larger cities has multiplied and to the United Nations, was based on recom- the Ministry of Economy, the Ministry of Inter- several industrial enterprises have moved out- mendations of the IWRM Dialogue”. In addi- nal Affairs, the Ministry of Finance, the Min- side these cities. In some regions, especially tion, a comprehensive overview and discussion istry of Social Affairs as well as scientists and around the capital city of Tallinn, it has creat- on IWRM and WFD principles, differences and experts. ed difficulties in meeting the demand for water similarities was compiled and translated into and sanitation. English On the sub-basin level, more detailed analysis, administration and development of measures During national consultations, it was discov- As a follow up to the dialogue, the Estoni- are carried out by means of sub-district riv- ered that the time allotted for processing de- an Water Management Committee together er basin management plans. Working groups, tailed and municipal planning was too short with the Estonian Water Association will or- comprised of Ministry of Environment agen- for the consideration of all water related is- 4
  5. 5. CREDIT: CARMEN HAMCHEVICI structure, investment management, etc. Since 2002, “Apele Romane” has been re- sponsible for the implementation of EU water-related directives, especially Wa- ter Framework Directive EC/2000/60. The National Agency for Environmental Pro- tection works with other environment elements, such as air, soil, radioactivity and biodiversity as well as links among these factors and water. On the international level, Romania closely cooperates with the Internation- al Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR). Taking into ac- count the trans-boundary character of the Danube River, which is the second longest river in Europe, the ICPDR has established a detailed action plan for the development of the Danube Internation- al River Basin management plan.Romanian part of the Danube Delta is a part of the UNESCO list of World Heritage Sitessues. The inconsistency of various spatial plans, Following the requirements of the above men- Considering the current water price level, indevelopment plans and cooperation among tioned and other WFD relevant directives (the Estonia water is no longer a free economicdifferent ministries should be considered as an Nitrates Directive, the Sewage Sludge Directive benefit; it is valued and its use is monitoredinevitable transition difficulty which shall be and the Bathing Water Directive) and the mon- and regulated by a permit. The principles ofovercome in the future. itoring and reporting obligations to European the economic valuation of water and determi- Commission consumes a considerable amount nation of a fair water price with the consid-ROLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS of the limited financial and human resources. eration of social factors have been relative-According to a new regulation that took effect Most Environment Investment Centre funds al- ly well observed in Estonian water resourcethis year and that can be considered a big step located to water resource management have management.forward, the requests of municipalities for financ- been used to co-finance the above mentioneding water protection measures from the Environ- local water supply and sanitation projects and The relative importance of the Water Abstrac-mental Investment Centre are assessed on the therefore the possibility of implementing other tion Charge in the price of water is low (lessbasis of the priorities set in the sub-basin man- measures, such as water body remediation, are than 1/10) and thus it does not have muchagement plan. In this way, municipalities have be- fairly limited. influence on sustainable water use. It is thecome interested in expressing their problems and price of water, not the Water Abstractionare more eager to actively participate in the de- WATER PRICING Charge, which encourages domestic consum-velopment of water management plans. The Water Framework Directive is the first legal ers and enterprises to save water. At present, act that introduces economic measures - one the Water Pollution Charge rate is lower thanIn addition to the water management plans of the main IWRM principles - into the EU wa- wastewater treatment costs and therefore itwhich are made for river basin districts and ter policy. In Estonia, the Environmental Charg- does not encourage water companies to de-sub-districts, the Public Water Supply and es Act established two main environmental crease pollution loads. The main factor lim-Sewerage Act obliges local governments to de- charges concerning water resource manage- iting pollution is the amount allowed by thevelop more detailed public water supply and ment: the water abstraction charge and the permit for the use of water, because if thesewerage development plans which are con- pollution charge for the emission of pollutants amount of discharged pollutants into the en-sistent with the objectives of river basin man- into a water body, groundwater or soil, which vironment exceeds the permitted figures, theagement plans. are mainly paid by companies. In addition to Pollution Charge rate is multiplied by a fac- these charges, consumers pay for drinking wa- tor of 10.To comply with stringent legislation, rural mu- ter and sewerage services.nicipalities are improving parts of their drink- Currently, water tariffs cover the operation anding and wastewater infrastructure with sup- Estonia has gradually ceased to provide wa- maintenance costs of water companies. Usu-port from the European Union. Upon entering ter as a free economic benefit and within the ally water companies admit that current waterthe EU in 2004, Estonia agreed to ensure prop- last 15 years, it has taken significant steps to- tariffs do not cover investment costs. Accord-er wastewater collection and treatment in all wards implementing the principle of the real ing to the estimates of WFD’s Article 5 reportsettlements with more than 2000 people by the price of water as well as Full Cost Recovery and on Estonia, the average level to which supportend of 2010 (the Urban Waste Water Directive) the Polluter Pays Principle. In 2007, the average maintenance, upkeep and investment costsand to supply drinking water for settlements price for drinking water supply and wastewater are covered is about 70%. In most EU mem-with more than 50 inhabitants by the end of treatment for domestic customers was approx- ber states water tariffs are also generally lower2013 (the Drinking Water Directive). imately 1.55 €/m3 and for businesses 2.1 €/m3. than the level of cost recovery. 5
  6. 6. Regional Consultative Water Financing MeetingTHE GLOBAL WATER PARTNERSHIP AND EU- Ms. Tamar Beruchasvili, the Deputy State Minis- tion for the Black Sea and others. GWP CACE-ROPEAN UNION WATER INITIATIVE FINANCING ter of Georgia on European and Euro-Atlantic In- NA and its Country Water Partnerships have theWORK GROUP TOOK PLACE IN TBILISI ON FEB- tegration, honored us with her presence at the potential to help in bringing coordination in allRUARY 5-7. meeting on the final day. She had just finished projects that deal with water resources. hosting the EU Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) meet- ing which had been held parallel with the GWP The 60 participants from 8 CACENA countries Water Financing meeting. The new ENP+ plans together with observers from GWP Central and to reach out to Central Asian countries. Alan Hall Eastern Europe (CEE) had five “Expert Panels”The meeting was opened by Mr. Zaza Gamcem- from the Global Water Partnership Organisation with introductory presentations and active dis-lidze, the Minister of Environmental Protec- gave a presentation entitled “IWRM Helps to Solve cussions of the following topics:tion and Natural Resources of Georgia. The EU Financing Problems” where 50% of water financ-delegation to Georgia was represented by Mr. ing demands are for governance reforms. 1. Assessment of cost reforms in the water re-Michal Nekvasil, who pointed out that lack of source management system within the EUfunding was a key constraint to achieving the A session with international programs and their Water Framework Directivewater related targets of the Millennium Devel- roles in financing the water sector covered 2. Assessment of existing mechanisms of serv-opment Goals. This Meeting among the coun- Georgia and the South Caucasus region but also ice fees and setting of benchmarks with le-tries of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Cen- Central Asia in some cases, with contributions gal and organizational aspectstral Asia (EECCA) is of high significance to help from USAID, the European Bank for Reconstruc- 3. Identification of domestic and foreign fi-mitigate this shortcoming. The EUWI looks for- tion and Development, the World Bank, the Mil- nancing sourcesward to the next country level initiatives of lennium Development Fund, the UNDP-ENVSEC 4. Involvement of local organizations in theGWP Central Asia and Caucasus. Project, the TACIS EU - Environmental Coopera- joint financing of the water sector 5. The role of the GWP in assisting in improved CREDIT: RICHARD MULLER/GWP CEE water sector financing During a discussion, GWP CEE representatives shared their experience gained during the proc- ess of EU Water Directive implementation. Milan Matuska, the GWP CEE Regional Coordinator, presented two proposals on how GWP CACE- NA and CEE regions can cooperate. One way is to write a regional paper, summarizing expe- riences from selected CEE countries, including examples from trans-boundary river basins, i.e. the Elbe, Oder and Wistula. The other option is to develop bilateral project proposals on differ- ent IWRM aspects. “Common projects could be supported by newly established Official Devel- opment Assistance (ODA) funds in the new EU member states”, says Matuska. As to the outcome of the meeting, the partici- pants signed a Joint Resolution which will be available in the form of a meeting report togeth-Tbilisi hosted GWP and EUWI Regional Consultative Meeting on Water Financing er with the results from the Expert Panels. New GWP ToolBox publication THE BOOK FOCUSES ON INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS, has been helping to fill since it launched its IWRMRM REFORMS OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL INSTITUTIONS. ToolBox several years ago. As the GWP rationale for the ToolBox states: “IWRM places novel demands on As countries begin adopting Integrated Water Resourc- rs the policymaker, operator and water user, but offers es Management (IWRM), second-order tasks become in- more comprehensive, efficient and powerful ap- - creasingly important. The repertoire of tools and tech- proaches than those tried hitherto.” niques for planning and executing these tasks however, is not nearly so well developed or comprehensive as those Key second-order tasks under IWRM include serv- used by more traditional practitioners in the water sector. ice and infrastructure planning, system and re- This constitutes a major resource gap – one which GWP source modelling, institutional development and/ 6
  7. 7. or reform, financing, policy and law making, the IWRM planning processes. Driven by GWP • public participation, negotiation of con- conflict resolution, stakeholder relations, pub- Central Asia and Caucasus (CACENA) represent- flicts, awareness raising. lic awareness, capacity building and knowl- ative initiatives, ToolBox activities were then edge sharing. introduced into CACENA at the end of 2003. The first book arising from the ToolBox train- Based on the four years of experience gained in ing activities, published in 2004, was devoted CEE and CACENA, these activities included a se- to IWRM in the context of the EU policy. ries of training courses and seminars. This new publication summarizes the proceed- All the ToolBox training courses and seminars ings from the training course held in Batumi, aimed to promote the application of IWRM Georgia in the summer of 2007, and deals with The IWRM ToolBox is already a well known in- practices. In addition, the CACENA water ex- institutional arrangements, reforms of water strument to support capacity building and to perts were interested in sharing CEE experi- and environmental institutions. The first part increase the capabilities of water profession- ence and lessons learned in implementing the of the publication summarizes the presenta- als in approaching different aspects of water new EU water legislation. The courses provided tions based on the ToolBox instruments, while planning. an extensive review of IWRM approaches in- the second part deals with concrete exam- cluding: ples of institutional arrangements and organ- During the first phase of its existence, between • water planning and water management ization reforms that have been made in recent 2001–2003, the ToolBox was used in the GWP • translation of water policy into legislation years in the CEE and CACENA regions. Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) region in edu- • integrating economics into water planning Danka Thalmeinerova, ToolBox Officer, GWP cation and training activities tailored to address and policy Secretariat, StockholmManaging floods and ships on the DanubeTWO GROUNDBREAKING INITIATIVES WERE to avoid some of the terrible impacts caused byLAUNCHED IN MARCH TO HELP REDUCE THE floods in recent years. Using the system, countriesIMPACTS OF TWO KEY PRESSURES ON WATERS, will have up to 10 days to prepare crucial activitiesECOLOGY AND SETTLEMENTS IN THE DANUBE such as evacuating communities, building sandbagRIVER BASIN. walls and switching off water supplies to avoid po- tential contamination. The system was developedCaptained by the International Commission for the System´, the first international system for fore- for the ICPDR by the Joint Research Centre of theProtection of the Danube River Basin (ICPDR), the casting Danube floods and providing early flood European Commission. (Visit: initiative is the `Danube-European Flood Alert warning. Danube-EFAS will help Danube countries icpdr-pages/pr_2008_03_11_efas.htm) CREDIT: DRP/ MELLO The second initiative is the first agreement (or `Joint Statement´) among government, indus- try, developers, scientists and conservationists about how to balance new navigation (or in- land waterway transport) projects with envi- ronmental protection on the Danube. Naviga- tion was found to be a key problem for the Danube in the past and there was a need to ensure that new navigation projects do not cause further damage. One reason is to help meet the EU Water Framework Directive. An- other is to balance EU plans for making the Danube into a major transport corridor, as a sustainable alternative to road transport. In response, the Joint Statement provides a set of principles that guide how the development of navigation projects should be done prop- erly. The Statement was further agreed to by the Budapest-based Danube Commission on Navigation and the Zagreb-based Interna- tional Commission for the Sava River Basin. (Visit: ) Enhancing navigation on the Danube can only be one of the goals - another one is to preserve natural resources for future generation. 7
  8. 8. High-Level Policy DialogueEUROPAN UNION SANITATION POLICIES AND European Commission, on the safer manage- the fact that in some of the EU member statesPRACTICES IN 2008, THE INTERNATIONAL YEAR ment of wastewater in small rural settlements. almost 40% of the population still do not haveOF SANITATION. The proposed improvements were based not access to safe sanitation. According to a recent only on traditional solutions but also on sus- GWP CEE study, a total of 20 million citizens inWomen in Europe for a Common Future – in tainable and further water saving solutions al- the European Union need access to safe and af-cooperation with GWP Central and Eastern Eu- ready applied on a small and medium scale in fordable sanitation.rope, the European Water Partnership, KIWA some EU countries.Water Research, Coalition Clean Baltic and Co- Therefore, new affordable and sustainable ap-ram Industries - organized a High-Level Policy The event brought together 70 key experts from proaches are needed in the EU countries, es-Dialogue entitled “EU Sanitation Policies and all sectors, including GWP CEE sustainable sani- pecially the new member states, allowing for aPractices in 2008, the International Year of San- tation experts from Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary, broader scope of management, financing anditation” in Brussels on January 29th. Moldova, Romania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia technological options better suited to the dif- and Ukraine, as well as different EU Commis- ferent needs across the EU.The objective of the High-Level Policy Dialogue sion representatives.was to raise awareness and stimulate political For more information, please visit www.gwp-will within the European Union, especially the The importance of the event was underlined by ceeforum.orgCREDIT: BOGDAN MACAROL International Year of Sanitation: 2008 THE UNITED NATIONS HAS DECLARED 2008 THE „INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF SANITATION“. The theme is designed to raise awareness and accelerate progress towards the Millennium De- velopment Goal (MDG) target to reduce by half the proportion of the 2.6 billion people without access to basic sanitation by 2015. As more than 2.6 billion people world wide are without proper water, sanitation and hygiene facilities, the International Year of Sanitation aims to put these challenges at the forefront of the international agenda. For more information on the International Year of Sanitation: The dialogue was well timed for 2008 International Year of Sanitation Volume 8, Issue No. 1/2008, April 2008 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:, 8