European Union Water Initiative EECCA Working Group meeting

Transcription

1 European Union Water Initiative EECCA Working Group meeting EU Project Environmental Protection of International River Basins (EPIRB) in the wider Black Sea basin Challenges and benefits Timothy Turner, Team Leader Helsinki, October 24 th -25th, 2013

2 Project Location and Partners Armenia Water Resources Management Agency, MNP Azerbaijan Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources State Agency of Water Resources, MES Belarus Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Georgia Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection Moldova Ministry of Environment Ukraine Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources State Agency of Water Resources Start Date: 30 Jan 2012 End Date: 29 Jan 2016 Duration: 48 months Budget: 7.5 million 2

3 Overall Project Objective To improve water quality in the transboundary river basins of the wider Black Sea region and Belarus 3

4 Specific Project Objectives To improve availability and quality of data on the ecological, chemical, and hydro-morphological status of transboundary river basins including groundwater To develop River Basin Management Plans for selected river basins / sub-river basins according to the requirements of the WFD 4

5 Results to be Achieved Increased capacities of the respective national authorities in for hydro-biological, chemical, and hydro-morphological monitoring of water quality including groundwater - quality assurance procedures in laboratories in place Increased technical capacities by means of development and implementation of River Basin Management Plans for selected rivers. 5

6 Results of the Selection Process: Belarus/Ukraine The Upper Dnieper Basin - the area north of Kiev, combining the major tributaries of the Dnieper, upstream of the Kiev Reservoir Main argument for the selection is to ensure protection of freshwater resources vitally important for power generation, drinking water supply, irrigation and industry between the two countries Importance of the river is particularly high downstream of the Kiev reservoir that includes the city of Kiev with a population of about 5 million 6

7 Results of the Selection Process: Moldova/Ukraine The Prut Basin - trans-boundary area between Ukraine, Moldova and Romania is selected as a pilot basin The Prut is part of the greater Danube basin and thus Ukraine and Moldova have reporting obligations under ICPDR Fulfilling these obligations will motivate further approximation of Ukraine and Moldova towards the EU WFD-compliant assessment methodology of RBMP process 7

8 Results of the Selection Process: Armenia The Akhurian Basin District - the area combining hydrological basins of the Akhurian and Metsamor rivers is selected as the pilot for Armenia The basin is trans-boundary with the neighbouring Turkey; Surface waters are heavily modified and regulated by number of water reservoirs for power generation, irrigation and industrial activities The Basin District is managed by a competent authority - the Akhurian BMO; surface and groundwater monitoring infrastructure is well established, the data regularly maintained 8

9 Results of the Selection Process: Azerbaijan The right tributaries of the Central Kura, starting from the Georgian border before the Mingechavir reservoir, including four major watersheds of the Agstafachay, Tovuzchay, Shamkirchay and Ganjachay rivers, are selected as the pilot area in Azerbaijan These small rivers, along with extensive groundwater wells and aquifers, form major freshwater sources for irrigation use and drinking water supply in the western part of Azerbaijan 9

10 Results of the Selection Process: Georgia The Chorokhi-Adjaristskali Basin District is selected as the project pilot area in Georgia It includes the Georgian part of the Chorokhi trans-boundary river, its major tributary - the Adjaristkhali sub-basin and some smaller watersheds directly draining to the Black Sea There is strong support of a regional environmental authority and good opportunity for the post-project sustainability of applying selected Program of Measure in life Specific water management issues may include construction of a planned HPP cascade in the basin, and distortion of hydro-morphological balance, degradation of natural ecosystems, etc. 10

11 In addition in the Caucasus development work on the monitoring programmes and RBMPs will build upon the achievements of previous EU Kura II and III projects. The project is implementing Joint Field Surveys ( multidiscipline and international teams) both in the selected country basins and the Alazani and Krami-Debed study basins. 11

12 Country commitments to the WFD Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine under the Association agreements could perhaps be committing themselves the following: Development of provisions of the River Basin Management Authority (Article 3 of Directive 2000/60/EU); should be implemented within 3 years. Determination of areas of river basins and the creation of mechanisms of international rivers, lakes and coastal waters (Article 3 ); should be implemented within 6 years. Analysis of the characteristics of river basin districts (Article 5 ); should be implemented over 6 years. Introduction of water quality monitoring programs (Article 8 ); should be implemented within 6 years from the date of entry into force of this Agreement. Preparation of river basin management plans, conduct public consultation and publication of these plans (Article 13 and 14); should be implemented within 10 years. 12

13 Armenia Country commitments to the WFD The legal framework for water resources management in Armenia is well developed and generally consistent with EU WFD principles. Azerbaijan Azerbaijan is making progress towards approaching international standards in IWRM. It has large irrigation infrastructure and hence it intends to combine an irrigation-oriented approach with IWRM concepts and tools, not necessarily under WFD principles. Belarus The water legislation in Belarus has been reviewed a number of times in recent years, with a view to reflect IWRM principles such as those set forth in the EU WFD. However, although Belarus is moving towards IWRM, current legal framework does not reflect EU WFD requirements. 13

14 Water Framework Directive The overall objective of the WFD is good status of all waters (surface water and groundwater). For water bodies which are (expected to be) of less than good status, plans of measures have to be prepared and implemented in order to improve the status to become at least good. Whether or not water bodies are of good status has to be determined through monitoring and assessment. 14

15 Key WFD Benefits Provides clear environmental objectives and bounds for water development under IWRM primciple. It defines the third pillar and balances the economic and social objectives. Delivers a strong management and governance framework for water quality and quantity, with standard methodologies and protocols. It reinforces inter-disciplinary coordination and active stakeholder participation in decision making both central to the IWRM concept Provides a common legal and regulatory framework for management of international River basins ( we can compare apples with apples) 15

16 WFD Implementation - Overall Challenges The project can assist the countries with the implementation of and compliance with WFD but it has to be realistic. Implementation and compliance will take many years and require considerable funding by the beneficiary countries as well as political engagement and support. The project can only hope to start or reinforce the process at the national and international levels. WFD is extremely complex legislation requiring new techniques, improved capacities, investment and in some cases institutional reform. There has to be long-term planning in the development of monitoring systems and River Basin Management it is currently only short term, often linked to technical assistance. Implementation of WFD should be seen as wider implementation of IWRM concept and not a stand alone exercise. The objectives set by the WFD may be questioned and should take account of objectives within an IWRM framework 16

17 WFD Implementation - Overall Challenges WFD establishes an ecological quality union the rules of which all basin countries need to obey if it is to deliver. Finally, it is expensive. 17

18 Compliant Monitoring Programmes - expected results: At the national level - Biological monitoring methodology and classification system RBA, reference site identification, EQRs, on-site training (Joint Field Surveys). Challenges: Coverage, macro-invertebrates only, capacity, development time. - Hydromorphological monitoring methodology. Challenges: Coverage, capacity, training, institutional reform and information exchange - Chemical Status monitoring programme (Annex VIII and X) and strengthened QA/QS procedures, on-site training and problem solving. Challenges: Investment, training - GW monitoring programme reference site identification, on-site training. Challenges: Coverage, capacity, institutional reform and information exchange - Ecological monitoring methodology and classification system, including chemophysico general conditions. Challenges: Coverage, integration of classification systems, development time 18

19 Compliant Monitoring Programmes - expected results: At the national level - Road-Maps for long-term development of WFD compliant monitoring programmes ( 5-10 year programmes) to be living documents for the duration of the project and to be adopted at the project closure. Challenges: Inter-sectoral coordination At the pilot basin level - Ecological, chemical and GW monitoring plans for surveillance, operational and investigative monitoring and JFS for gap-filling based on pressure/impact analysis of water bodies at risk. 19

20 River Basin Management Plans - expected results: At the pilot basin level - Delineate basins into water bodies and water body types, and water bodies at risk and heavily modified. Challenges: Rationalisation of the water body numbers and water body types; analysis of heavily modified water bodies data gaps. - River Basin Management plans consistent with the WFD while at the same time meeting national requirements. Plans which are adoptable and implementable. Challenges: Lack of River Basin Authority involvement and ownership; Data scarcity; Production of realistic Programme of Measures staged, reflecting budgetary constraints and priorities; Weak classification systems (monitoring programmes not in place); Public Involvement - timing and feed-back; Economic Analysis, Adoption procedures 20

21 River Basin Management Plans - expected results: At the transboundary basin level: - Upstream, pollution input assessments for the Upper Dnieper and Middle Kura. - Single RBMP for the River Prut incorporating Moldova, Ukraine and Romania Challenges as above times three 21

22 Thanks for your attention! 22