IWRM 1 WORKSHOP REPORT

Transcription

1 IWRM 1 WORKSHOP REPORT TA 8267-THAI Strengthening Integrated Water and Flood Management Implementation July 2014 Prepared for ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

2 Prepared by Prepared for Copyright More information Project Team ICEM Asian Development Bank 2014 ICEM ICEM International Centre for Environmental Management 6A Lane 49, Tô Ngoc Vân Tay Ho, HA NOI, Socialist Republic of Viet Nam Meelit Shah, Andrew Mittleman, Jeremy Carew-Reid, Jorma Koponen, Keith Avery Ward, Lindsay Furness, Mai Vinh, Simon Tilleard, Charit Tingsabadh, Chanokporn Prompinchompoo, Sinee Chaungcham, Sacha Sethaputra, Tawatchai Rattanasorn, Vajirasak Vanijja, Vilas Nitivattananon, Apichart Anukularmphai, Apinya Anukularmphai, Jonathan Ho, Beau Damen, Machima Thongdejsri. ii

3 AB BRE VI AT IONS DFAT DGR DWR DNP EIA GIS GISTDA HAII IT IUCN IWRM M&E MAR MoF MoI MoNRE NCPO NESDB ONEP PDMO RID RTG SEA TA TOR Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia Department of Groundwater Resources Department of Water Resources Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation Environmental Impact Assessment Geographic Information System Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute Information Technology International Union for Conservation of Nature Integrated Water Resource Management Monitoring and Evaluation Managed Aquifer Recharge Ministry of Finance Ministry of Interior Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment National Council for Peace and Order National Economic and Social Development Board Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning Public Debt Management Office Royal Irrigation Department Royal Thai Government Strategic Environmental Assessment Technical Assistance Terms of Reference iii

4 EXECUT IVE SUMM ARY Under TA 8267-THAI Strengthening Integrated Water and Flood Management Implementation in Thailand - a national workshop which was held at the Eastin Grand Hotel, Sathorn in Bangkok on 2 nd and 3 rd July 2014 to promote awareness and consensus on the issues, tools and processes for improving Integrated Water Resources Management in Thailand. The following key points from meeting discussions are considered in more detail in this workshop report. Despite significant innovations in policy and institutional arrangements, including frameworks for river basin planning, implementation of IWRM principles has not progressed much and the work of the river basin committees has been hampered by lack of authority, staff capacity and budgets. Often current management practices leaves individual provinces to develop water management plans that become shopping lists of projects that do not address IWRM principles and are unable to be accommodated by central government agencies in their work programs and budgets. The reasons for this obstacle for integrated river basin planning and development include: - The legal status of River Basin Committees (RBCs) - The limited full time technical secretariat support provided to each RBC - The limited resources available to conduct effective planning processes that integrate community concerns and science-based planning principles; - Despite efforts to delegate management decisions to basin level organizations, decision making and budget allocation processes remain centralised; and - Existing institutional arrangements foster a sector oriented approach and as a result in each basin there is a lack of data sharing, modelling tool capabilities and coordination amongst water management agencies and stakeholders. It was agreed that institutional arrangements and structures are a critical element for more effective IWRM in Thailand with focussed discussion on the benefits of a water ministry and the need for sharper definition of responsibilities between key agencies such as RID and DWR. In practice this means the development of measures to facilitate more decentralized decision-making processes and empower Thailand s River Basin Committees (RBCs) including: - Capacity building for basin-level stakeholders; - Improved support from line agencies; - Improved information and data sharing; - Better collaboration on basin modelling tools; - Improved access to budgetary resources; - Clearly defined legal status; and - Better integration of RBCs and basin-level stakeholders into the consultation and approval processes for water development projects. Making these reforms requires a change in mind-set for water resources management in Thailand. This will require consideration of a new vision for water in Thailand that goes beyond the current somewhat restricted vision of the water agencies, which focus on solutions for floods, droughts and water quality rather than integrated management approaches. More attention needs to be given to the role of water in Thailand s broader development agenda and addressing problems associated with unsound urban development in floodplain areas and unsustainable agricultural practices. At an institutional level, there is a need to facilitate better coordination between Thailand s various water governance agencies and promote transparency, cross sector information and data sharing and planning including greater use of collaborative spatial planning and strategic environmental assessment. At an operational level there needs to be a shift away from an emphasis on engineering solutions for water management and towards developing more integrated management approaches based on ecosystem sustainability, consultation, scientific information and a transparent evaluation processes. iv

5 TABLE O F CO NTE NT S ABBREVIATIONS... III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... IV 1 INTRODUCTION Background DETAILED DISCUSSION SUMMARY DAY 1 2 JULY Session 1-Integrated Water Resources Management principles and approaches Session 2-The role of environment planning and assessment tools in water resources management Session 3 - Panel on achieving sustainability in water resources management Session 4 - Satellite monitoring and modelling in water resources management DAY 2 3 JULY Session 5 - Social issues and community involvement in water resources management Session 6 - Economic planning and sustainability at river basin level Session 7 - Panel on achieving effective river basin planning and management in Thailand 8 3 WRAP UP & NEXT STEPS (SESSION 8) APPENDIX 1. WORKSHOP PROGRAM LIST OF APPENDICES INCLUDED AS ATTACHMENTS v

6 1 INTRO DUCTIO N 1. 1 B A C K G R O U N D The TA 8267 Team commenced its activities with an inception mission in January 2014 which was followed by a program missions by the modelling, social, economic and environment teams. During these missions, the team met with government agencies and community groups in Bangkok as well as in the Yom basin. Based on the information gained during these meetings and a review of the background material provided to the team, an Inception Report was prepared and submitted in April The inception phase included the national workshop held at the Eastin Grand Hotel, Sathorn in Bangkok on 2 nd and 3 rd July 2014 to present findings and help build consensus on the issues, tools and processes for improving Integrated Water Resources Management in Thailand. The workshop provided a forum to promote cooperative discussion between some 80 technical specialists from government agencies and institutes as well as NGO s and civil society organisations concerned with IWRM. The format of the workshop consisted of presentations from the TA Team and responses from key water resources and environment management agencies, who shared their experiences in implementing integrated water and river basin management. This was followed by plenary discussion and expert panel sessions. The panel sessions allowed a more detailed consideration of opportunities and obstacles to IWRM and how these could be addressed. Participants included personnel from key agencies involved in water management including the RID, DWR, DGR, DNP, MONRE, RFD, GISTDA, ONEP, NESDB and PDMO. Representatives from provincial offices included the Governor of Phrae Province and Deputy Governors from Sukhothai and Phrae Provinces. A detailed list of participants is included as Appendix 2. This report summarises the presentations and key findings from the workshop. Presentations are given in Appendix 3. 1

7 2 DETAILE D DI SCUSSIO N SU MMARY The presentations are appended in the annexes in the report and key issues are discussed in the following sections D A Y 1 2 J U L Y S e s s i o n 1 - I n t e g r a t e d W a t e r R e s o u r c e s M a n a g e m e n t p r i n c i p l e s a n d a p p r o a c h e s The workshop was opened by Yasushi Negishi, Country Director, Thailand Resident Mission Asian Development Bank. He welcomed the guests and provided a brief background to the project. Meelit Shah, TA Team Leader, then outlined key deliverables from the project, the principles of IWRM with examples of international experience and their adoption in Thailand from 1997 in the 8 th National Development Plan. There was an impetus to decentralise water management planning by dividing the country into 25 river basins and the formation of river basin committees. The DWR was created and tasked with formulating water management policies. However, implementation of IWRM principles has not progressed as expected and the work of the river basin committees has been hampered by lack of budgets and legal authority, limited access to technical expertise and tools to facilitate integrated basin planning as well as complex institutional arrangements with multiple agencies across a number of ministries with responsibilities for water management. Water management plans have tended to be shopping lists of infrastructure projects rather than plans based on a holistic approach to basin development. Lindsay Furness, TA Groundwater Specialist gave a presentation on ground water management and the potential to mitigate floods and drought using managed aquifer recharge (MAR) techniques. The use of recharge ponds is one method successfully adopted in Australia and other countries. He referred to some of the good experimental work on MAR currently being carried out by DGR in the Yom Basin. Mr Sitthisak Manyou, Senior Geologist Department of Groundwater Resources described DGR s 5 year research project which showed that the top layer of the aquifer in the Yom basin had a depth of 30m and over time, water levels had been steadily dropping by 15cm per annum. There was potential for a wide network of MAR projects over smaller areas which could be implemented quickly. In response to a question from the Sukhothai Vice Governor, he said that the hydrogeological characteristics in Sukhothai Province were not favourable for large recharge projects and therefore the potential for flood mitigation using MAR was limited In response to a question on the use of artificial rain during droughts, it was pointed out that it was an expensive method and the efficiency was low and highly dependent on weather conditions. In his response to the TA Team presentations, Mr Saravuth Cheevaprasert, Director of Policy and Planning, Department of Water Resources highlighted the following main issues which are an impediment to the implementation of river basin management in Thailand: (i) Striking a balance between water management and use issues and environmental quality and ecosystem conservation. (ii) A change in mindset is necessary to overcome the restricted vision of only considering floods, droughts and water quality in water management. There is too much focus on supplying water for agriculture which only contributes 20% of the GDP. A broader perspective is necessary which aligns with national development goals taking into account social, economic and environmental considerations. The national development plans should be reframed to include both long term strategic plans (10-20 year) for integrated water management involving all relevant sectors as well as short term action plans (5 year). (iii) There is a need to coordinate the work of the various government agencies dealing with water management issues including information sharing for IWRM. Water is an enabling factor for national development and comanagement and multiple benefits are important principles that should be applied to the water planning process. (iv) Water is a finite resource and sector development priorities cannot be looked at in isolation. There is a need to take a holistic approach so that water can be used effectively within ecological limits. (v) Improved institutional arrangements are needed to facilitate IWRM which requires greater cross sector collaboration and transparency. Mr Cheevaprasert agreed that implementation of IWRM has been slow and budgets and decision making are still centralised. Management of the river basins should be decentralised and authority and budgets provided to local authorities, which have a better understanding of local issues and needs. The sectoral approach to planning and budget lines needs to be overcome. The budget of 100 million baht currently allocated to the DWR to further the 2

8 country s IWRM agenda is not enough. However, the current political changes in the country are an opportunity to introduce needed reforms to achieve integration in the water sector. In his response, Mr Pornmongkol Chitchob, Senior Civil Engineer of the Royal Irrigation Department (RID) pointed out that the development of water resources in the Yom basin was closely linked to the management of the larger Chao Phraya basin as a whole. In 2008, RID conducted extensive community consultation in the basin as part of a Yom Basin Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) commissioned in response to a Cabinet directive. Four options were identified which included structural and non-structural measures: I. No change II. Non-structural measures and a network of medium sized reservoirs on tributaries III. Option II plus two medium sized mainstream reservoirs (Upper Yom and the Lower Yom) IV. The large Kaeng Sua Ten reservoir Mr Chitchob explained that the SEA found there was considerable opposition to the Kaeng Sua Ten reservoir proposal from a small group of affected stakeholders even though the RID consultation process identified that as the preferred option. Following this experience in the Yom Basin, the RID response has been to try and further integrate public participation in the irrigation planning process. However, now local stakeholders were reluctant to trust the information provided by the RID even if the work was carried out on behalf of the Department by a third party. The 2009 ADB TA Piloting an Adaptive Approach to Implement Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in Yom River Basin project raised awareness of IWRM and adaptive management in the Yom Basin. It helped to develop community based suggestions for water management, build community networks and promoted a better relationship between the community and government agencies including the RID. Even though RID is not actively pursuing any large scale storage options, challenges still remain to overcome the issue of trust in the information and data being presented to the community, especially as so many agencies are involved in the water sector and there is a lack of coordination amongst them. The Hydro and Agro Informatics Institute (HAII) has partially addressed the issue of data sharing for modelling purposes amongst the government agencies although in practice this can be further improved. Mr Chitchob acknowledged that the current institutional arrangements and lack of coordination amongst the agencies made implementation of IWRM more difficult. However, the aftermath of the 2011 floods opened up many opportunities and incentives for the agencies to better coordinate their activities. In his response, Mr Sitthisak Manyou, Senior Geologist Department of Groundwater Resources reiterated that DGR had conducted a number of pilot MAR projects in collaboration with Khon Kaen University in the Yom Basin. He acknowledged that management of groundwater was more difficult than surface water and ground water levels in the basin were decreasing due to over exploitation, particularly in the Lower Yom Basin. Artificial recharge was therefore necessary to mitigate against this and achieve equilibrium. Enforcement of the Groundwater Act also needs to be strengthened. In the plenary discussions facilitated by Dr Sacha Sethaputra TA Team Hydrologist, it was acknowledged that having the big three - DWR, DGR and RID - in the same room provided a unique opportunity for discussion of water management issues. A question was raised about the cost effectiveness of ground water recharge schemes, quality of the recharge water and whether EIA s were required for such schemes. As these schemes are currently pilot projects, there was insufficient data to make generalisations and more analysis would be required. Dr Apichart Anukularmphai, Senior Advisor to ADB for this TA 8267, raised issues on the sustainability of groundwater projects, the possible roles of provincial authorities in IWRM, whether River Basin Committees should have a role to approve projects in the basin prior to funding requests by the MoF and whether local agencies should be empowered in basin management. It was noted that the National Council for Peace and Order would be setting up a National Water Management Committee and may be considering proposals for a Ministry of Water which has been mooted for many years and which would address institutional issues in the river. It was agreed that the structure and mandate of institutions for effective IWRM needed to be reviewed and reformed. This would include empowerment of RBC s, capacity building and support from line agencies, access to budgets and legal status and authority to be consulted on and approve water development projects in the basin prior to funding requests. It was noted that only 10% of the budget for water resources management was allocated to the RBC s. To facilitate better understanding of what was being proposed in a water project, more consideration should be given to the way information on their costs and benefits, particularly of dam projects is presented to stakeholders. Full assessment of other factors including environmental and social aspects should engage stakeholders and be presented as well as a clear indication of who would benefit and who would be adversely impacted. 3

9 S e s s i o n 2 - T h e r o l e o f e n v i r o n m e n t p l a n n i n g a n d a s s e s s m e n t t o o l s i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s m a n a g e m e n t Dr Jeremy Carew-Reid and Dr Vilas Nitivattananon - TA Environment Specialists gave a presentation on the role of environment assessment and river basin planning. They outlined the various national, regional and local level plans related to the environment and water management in Thailand including those prepared by MoNRE - specifically, ONEP, DWR and RNP - as well as other agencies including RID, NESDB and MoI. They presented the hierarchy of SEA, EIA and monitoring and audit tools available to support integrated river basin planning and how these are used in Thailand and in the region. Thailand was one of the first countries in the region to explore the use of SEA s and adopted SEA guidelines in Whilst it is not mandatory, the National Environment Board can require an agency to conduct an SEA. ONEP is working with eleven line agencies on guidelines to determine when SEA s should be mandatory. Examples of the application of SEA s in the region were presented and the distinctive nature of SEA s in the Mekong region compared to Europe explained. In Europe development planning frameworks are robust and required to embrace sustainability and integration across sectors on a one area-one plan basis. Planning processes are consultative and science evidence based. Comprehensive data and analysis is usually available. SEA s are designed as rapid sustainability audits used to check whether a development plan has conformed to well defined regulations for ecological sustainability and IWRM. In the Mekong region, where the planning frameworks are evolving and where consultation and data are limited, SEA teams find they must stand in the shoes of the planners and fill many of the basic gaps such as original research on critical issues, consideration of alternative development scenarios and their impacts, and cumulate and cross sector effects. In these situations, SEAs are used to fulfil many of the key functions that a good development planning process should satisfy including sustainability analysis and integrated spatial and cross sectoral assessment. The need for improvements in the SEA, EIA and environmental management planning processes and tools in the water sector in Thailand was highlighted for discussion. Innovations to be considered include legislative commitment to SEAs and guidance for water sector agencies and greater emphasis on ecological sustainability principles reflected in environmental management plans, their implementation and monitoring. In his response, Dr Wijarn Simachaya Deputy Permanent Secretary at MoNRE, stressed the need to take a bigger picture view of water resources management issues and not to be focussed on sector specific views. He acknowledged that there had been problems in applying the EIA process in Thailand and reiterated that SEA s were not mandatory and were directed to be done by the NEB when necessary. He also said that SEAs were not meant to be vehicles for supporting preconceived projects but they should address the broader strategic framework of safeguards and directions within which projects can be planned and approved. There is no clear guidance on when an SEA should be conducted - so decisions to apply the tool tend to be arbitrary, project focussed and reactive to public pressure rather than an important tool to be applied systematically for all development and spatial plans. Dr Simachaya agreed that the RBC s set up through the DWR had not been very active or effective. This was due to a result of a lack of legal status and subsequent difficulty in allocating larger budgets to them. A budget of 2 million baht had been allocated to each province to develop water management plans which tend to be a shopping list of projects not planned according to IWRM principles. It is difficult to draw together all provincial plans into a well integrated and balanced basin plan. There is a need to have an assessment methodology and tools to evaluate resources so that a balance can be struck between development goals and ecological sustainability as in the case of the Mae Wong Dam. There are many conflicting issues associated with water management and resistance from some stakeholders to infrastructure projects cannot be ignored. There is a need for scientific information, well communicated and shared with stakeholders, so that decision making can be science based and credible in the eyes of those affected.. In her response Mrs Duchanee Cheypet, Senior Environmental Specialist, Royal Irrigation Department explained that the SEA for the Yom basin was conducted by Mahidol University for RID based on a Swedish model. The SEA was commissioned because the projects it addressed had a budget in excess of 1 Billion Baht. A comprehensive social and environmental impact assessment had already been carried out for the proposed projects. She also mentioned the SEA for the Kong Chi Mun project which established a model for carrying out such assessments. In the plenary discussion facilitated by Dr Sinee Chuangcham, TA Social Specialist, Dr Apichart Anukularmphai clarified that the 2 million baht budget provided to the provinces through the DWR was meant to develop a river basin plan and was not allocated for provincial level plans. This highlighted the lack of coordination among the various provinces and the fragmented nature of such water management plans which did not address basin wide issues. 4

10 S e s s i o n 3 - P a n e l o n a c h i e v i n g s u s t a i n a b i l i t y i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s m a n a g e m e n t The panel session was moderated by Dr John Dore, Senior Water Resources Advisor, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), Australia. Dr Dore pointed out that achieving sustainability in water resources management was not just about engineering solutions and the issue was more complex. It requires accommodation of a diverse range of views from multiple stakeholders at national, provincial and local levels. Dr Nawarat Krairapanond, Director, ONEP advocated using an ecosystems approach to river basin planning based on the Policy and Plan for enhancement and conservation of national environmental quality from 1997 to That Policy uses a watershed classification to reserve land in the upper watershed. If this framework were to be strictly enforced, almost 40% of Thailand will be managed as protected area with strict development controls. This has proved to be a major constraint in implementation of the Policy. ONEP is supporting the preparation of ecosystems based river basin plans which take the watershed classification system into account. The other consideration is to take account of climate change. ONEP will be developing an adaptation action plan for water resource management as part of the Thai National Climate Change Strategy Dr Songtam Suksawang Director of the Research Division, Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation emphasised the need to identify the remaining forest area in each basin. Whilst forest areas in all basins have increased following a period of high deforestation, nationwide, 40% of the country needs to have forest cover to ensure sustainability and health in natural flows. There is pressure to balance the need for more reservoirs as proposed by RID and the need to protect forest areas. Dams may not necessarily provide the solution for IWRM. Dr Robert Mather - Head of Southeast Asia Group, International Union for Conservation of Nature spoke about balancing benefits to society of water use and conservation. He gave an analogy comparing the water resources of Thailand to a 1.5m deep swimming pool covering the entire country. Due to seasonal variations, the pool would overflow in some years and not fill up in others. This was a natural phenomenon and ecosystems had adapted over time to withstand such variations. However, in recent years, water and flood management priorities were complicated by unsound urban development in floodplain areas and unsustainable agricultural practices. Dr Mather highlighted the skewed nature of water use under current policies whereby of 70% of the water is used for agriculture when it only contributes 10% of the GDP. He questioned the policy of increasing rice production where second and third rice crops are being grown which impose a huge strain on the water resources. Instead, he advocated moving to high value less water demanding crops which would need a change in government policy and support. He also spoke of the need to consider adaptation and retreat measures for flood mitigation as opposed to the protect solutions currently being considered. This would negate the need for large investments in flood protection schemes and refocus on sustainable management of the watershed through a complementary bottom up ecosystem management approaches. Following the workshop, Dr Mather s presentation was published in the Bangkok Post and the full article appears as Appendix 5. A plenary session was facilitated by Dr Vilas Nitivattananon. A number of comments were made during this session: There is a need for collaboration amongst the agencies but this is proving difficult due to the institutional arrangements in place which encourages a territorial mentality. The role of the RBC s in general and the Yom RBC in particular is not clearly understood in part due to the lack of clarity in their legal status. The budgets for RBCs are inadequate and do not allow for more than two or three meetings a year. Water management plans should be basin wide and there is a need to have collective consultations with stakeholders from across the basin so that issues and impacts in one area can be understood by stakeholders in other areas. Top down and bottom up planning are not mutually exclusive and there is a need for both approaches. A minority of stakeholders can stop projects which may be beneficial overall. Mechanisms and approaches for consultative planning and innovative design for multiple uses need to be developed. The RID focuses on irrigation areas but more than 60% of the agricultural area in Phrae is non-irrigated and projects in these areas need to be considered. A balance needs to be struck between meeting community needs and forest conservation - the farming season is only 4 months at the moment in many areas of Phrae with the current infrastructure. Provincial and local budget allocation should be improved so that local development projects can be managed at the provincial level. 5

11 Capacity building should not only be provided at the national level but also at the provincial and local levels so that there is sufficient capability at the provincial level to contribute in developing and managing river basin plans. Information sharing should be improved and agencies should have more coordination of activities to avoid piece meal development in the basin. RBCs should be consulted on any development plans in their basin S e s s i o n 4 - S a t e l l i t e m o n i t o r i n g a n d m o d e l l i n g i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s m a n a g e m e n t Dr Anond Snidvongs Executive Director, Geo-informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTA) gave a presentation on the role of satellite monitoring in water management and IWRM in Thailand. The types of satellites available, their orbit cycles and spatial resolution were outlined. The parameters monitored and types of analysis carried out by GISTDA were presented with examples of outputs including the monitoring of cropped areas and planting times to match water availability and to schedule releases. Simon Tilleard TA Water Resources Analyst, gave a presentation on the use of modelling tools to inform river basin and water management in Thailand. He explained how modelling tools can assist in the IWRM process. Examples of such applications were presented with typical outputs. This was followed by examples of modelling applications in Thailand. Mr Tilleard then demonstrated an integrated watershed modelling approach in the Yom basin with examples of typical outputs and how these could be used to make decisions. Typical management scenarios based on the RID SEA report were part of the modelling workplan in the TA. In her response, Ms Kalyanee Suwanprasert, Policy and Planning Analyst, DWR said that satellite information was not widely used at DWR and there were issues with user access. However, it was useful for more accurate forecasting. A plenary session was facilitated by Dr Sacha Sethaputra during which many comments were made. Dr Anond Snidvongs - GISTDA, commented that information from satellites provided very important data for modelling and monitoring real time situations which assisted in making good water management decisions. However, hydromet models are often criticised and their accuracy questioned which leads to a loss of confidence. This is one of the possible reasons why models are not used widely. Dr Snidvongs also commented on the current weather conditions and shared projections indicating that 2015 will be drier than normal. There was general appreciation of the need for basin wide modelling to understand the cumulative effects of various developments in the Yom Basin. Modelling and linked GIS tools are important in conveying the information and communicating with the local stakeholders. There are a number of agencies who use models for various purposes, although most are related to flood modelling. This often leads to duplication of effort. It was reiterated that it is very important to share data and all modelling should be carried out with access to the same data sets so that results can be compared and replicated and there is confidence in the outputs. There was need to consolidate all the modelling work under an umbrella organisation to retain the skills and avoid duplication of effort. It was suggested that HAII may be a suitable organisation. HAII collects data from RID, DWR and the Thai meteorological agency and uses it for carrying out its modelling work. Even so, the protocols for data sharing are not clear. The Yom Water Centre is linked to HAII and is interested in modelling the effects of proposed medium scale reservoirs. Currently the Centre is studying some schemes in the basin and is interested in being trained in the use of the TA IWRM Model. Mr Apichat Todilokvech, Phrae Provincial Governor said that models are an important aid to decision making and currently they do not have such tools to support them in assessing the different options. He also said that dams need to have a dual purpose in irrigation and flood mitigation. The Kaeng Sua Ten plan is no longer being pursued and the option of having two dams instead, namely the Upper and Lower Yom, may be a suitable alternative strategy. An alternative plan has been suggested by Dr Royol Chitradon, Director, HAII who favours development of small storage sites on the tributaries as well as the Upper Yom and Lower Yom reservoirs but with reduced storage capacities and an additional Ngao reservoir. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that having smaller reservoirs is more acceptable to the community. Mr Pornmongkol Chitchob, Senior Civil Engineer, Royal Irrigation Department, commented that the RID has been criticised for not considering smaller reservoirs. The experience with the Kaeng Sua Ten project proposal and the RID suggestions for the Upper Yom and Lower Yom reservoirs has faced opposition and all projects now face hurdles. There is a lack of trust within the community and any proposals put forward will have to overcome this 6

12 challenge. The RID was not convinced that storages on the tributaries would be sufficient to meet irrigation and flood management needs. A way forward may be to take a phased approach to develop the tributary reservoirs and study their impact and if additional storage was required, the mainstream larger reservoirs should be considered. Additional information on the socio-economic analysis carried out for the tributary storage schemes was required so that comparisons could be made D A Y 2 3 J U L Y S e s s i o n 5 - S o c i a l i s s u e s a n d c o m m u n i t y i n v o l v e m e n t i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s m a n a g e m e n t Andrew Mittelman TA Social specialist gave a presentation on approaches to taking social and community concerns into account in water resources planning management. He pointed out that the Thai constitution guarantees the rights of communities to participate in decision making and implementation of sustainable natural resource management. Whilst advances have been made, there is still a tendency to have a centre driven approach to planning and management. Consultative approaches have been shown to energise the local communities in considering all aspects of development projects and to take a broader basin-wide view which helps in resolving conflicts. Collaborative approaches infuse a sense of empowerment and ownership of projects. This requires a change in attitude within government agencies and an enabling environment for genuine consultations to occur where diverse views can be discussed. Representation on decision making bodies and a more supportive legal environment is necessary. Tawatchai Rattanasorn TA Community Participation Specialist gave a presentation on the benefits of local participation in water resources management planning and lessons learnt from previous experience in Thailand. Water management was to serve community needs and stakeholder concerns in how best to achieve wise management needed to be taken on board. One of the major criticisms of the previous government s National Water Master Plan was that insufficient account had been taken of the community concerns and information on mitigation measures had not been communicated well. Mr Rattanasorn gave examples of the different approaches to flood mitigation with community involvement. The focus was on soft measures as a smart response based on an understanding that there was always a risk that floods will occur and coping capacities need to be strengthened rather than focussing on hard protection measures for rare flooding events. In his response, Mr Apichat Todilokvech, Phrae Provincial Governor, said that the main concern in Phrae Province was drought. Currently the farming season is only 4 months. Supplementary water is required for dry season cropping and he would like to increase dry season cropping from the current 10,000 rai. The province is creating a geo-coordinated database of cropped areas so that water requirements can be matched to the available water. This is being trialled at a pilot project in Ampher Wangchin. In general, work is focussed at a provincial level and not basin wide. Without proper assessment and tools to compare options, projects tend to be formulated based on wants rather than needs. The province is compiling a list of prioritised water management projects which should be completed by the end of July. In his response, Piti Kaewsalabsri, Sukhothai Vice Provincial Governor said that Sukhothai is largely situated on a floodplain and receives flood waters from Phrae. During 2011, it received more than double the normal flow but Sukhothai City was not flooded. In 2012, Sukhothai City was flooded for 10 days and the water largely came from underground, not from the river as the Tambon authorities had built dykes to protect against riverine flooding. One of the strategies used for flood mitigation in Sukhothai is to divert flood water to the Nan basin and to release water from some dams to flood rice fields. However this strategy is not adequate. The critical flow for Sukhothai is reported to be 800 m 3 /s and as the river narrows to less than 150m at Sukhothai, there is little scope to divert water on to the floodplain. He reiterated the need for budgets to be allocated to the provincial and local offices and not to be retained at the centre as the locals knew what the issues were. There were benefits from flooding due to increased opportunities for fishing which needed to be considered when defining flood management strategies. The 2 million Baht budget provided to the province through DWR to formulate a water plan was viewed as a small piece in the jigsaw which may contribute in developing a basin plan. The work of the RBC was largely an uncoordinated effort to produce a basin plan. More needs to be done on national development policies with unambiguous priorities. He also commented that the current budgets for consultation were less than a third compared to 10 years ago. 7

13 In the plenary session facilitated by Tawatchai Rattanasorn, the discussion focussed on whether an area based approach should be used instead of the function based approach now taken by the government agencies for water management. The comments from the floor reiterated the need for accurate information and better communication so that stakeholders and decision makers could make plans and decisions in full knowledge of the consequences S e s s i o n 6 - E c o n o m i c p l a n n i n g a n d s u s t a i n a b i l i t y a t r i v e r b a s i n l e v e l Ms Ladwan Kumpa, Deputy Secretary-General, Office of the National Economic and Social Development Board, presented the background to the involvement of NESDB in water management issues and the history of water investment programs for each development planning stage. She was involved in the establishment of the RBCs under the DWR and the promotion of local participation and appreciates that it requires a lot of support. The 8 th National Development Plan mentioned IWRM. She described the various studies that have been conducted from 1994 onwards in relation to the national water resources management and the establishment of a water management committee in the Prime Minister s office in This committee met only once a year. She reiterated the continuing importance that the NCPO attaches to water issues and public participation. The NCPO would like to have a long term planning perspective which would not be reliant on government changes with a framework for all agencies to follow and which will incorporate the Royal initiatives proposed by His Majesty the King. In this regard, the NCPO will set up a restructured water management committee which will continue to work closely with the 25 river basin committees. Strengthening of local capacity for water management will be an important issue. Ms Kumpa raised a few concerns which need to be addressed such as the linking of RBCs and local authorities, the need to set realistic water use priorities given that Thailand will become a water scarce country and the importance of water in tourism development. She stressed that RBCs should consider and balance economic and environmental concerns and not be focussed on one issue only. As each province has different priorities, they will need to be assessed against the national development guidelines. Ms Kumpa stated that SEAs would be given importance and will become part of the national development planning process. When requesting budgets in the future, economic analysis will need to include a section on alternatives and where necessary an EIA. A section on public participation at a preliminary level will also need to be included. The role of the RBC needs to be clarified at both the central and provincial levels. Better communication is required and stakeholders will need to be provided with details of plans that they are able to understand and help shape. Ms Kumpa also said that the conversion rates used for economic analysis will need to be revised as these have not been updated for a while and adjustments may be needed for social upliftment projects. Dr Charit Tingsabadh, TA Economist, gave a presentation on economic planning at the river basin level and the linkages with the national economic plan, trade-offs between economic and environmental objectives and integrating economic and environmental planning in water resource management. He highlighted that the water resources sector in Thailand was mature with rising marginal costs for providing the water to users. Although there was consistency with broad policy directions, sectoral performance issues, public investment rationale and alternatives analysis were weak. Similarly, benefits and impacts valuation including environmental and other externalities were simplistic and poverty and risk analysis were largely absent. There is a tendency in the collection of projects towards the practice of irrigationalism. The key challenge is to embed economic thinking into IWRM processes at national and basin levels and to use economic analysis as a design tool. There is also a need to recognise the artificial demands imposed on the water sector as a result of national policies such as the rice pledging scheme which can significantly skew the demand profile. Strengthening the role of economic analysis in IWRM can pose challenges as well as provide opportunities. A plenary session on economic issues was facilitated by Dr Tingsabadh. The main issue discussed was the need to use the more up to date shadow price instead of the market price when carrying out economic analysis of projects. The conversion rates used in the NESDB manual on project analysis (2012) need to be updated. The current discount rate used by the RTG is 9-12%. This may require to be lowered for sustainable projects to 3-4%. The need for taking externalities into account in economic analysis for the national development plan and in planning major projects was stressed S e s s i o n 7 - P a n e l o n a c h i e v i n g e f f e c t i v e r i v e r b a s i n p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g e m e n t i n T h a i l a n d 8

14 The panel session was moderated by Dr Sinee Chuangcham TA Social specialist. Mr Apichat Todilokvech, Phrae Provincial Governor reiterated that the Kaeng Sua Ten reservoir plan had been shelved and was replaced by the Upper Yom and Lower Yom reservoir option. This option had a greater chance of acceptance although the level of the Lower Yom reservoir may need to be further reduced as agricultural areas were affected. The reduced storage levels in the reservoirs have shifted the focus away from residential areas being inundated to agricultural land inundation. Benefits in terms of flood protection and reduced risk of drought may still be acceptable. The schemes may need further analysis and should not be purely judged on cost/benefit analysis but should include a factor for reduction in risk against floods and droughts. IWRM principles should be applied to the schemes to consider impact on all aspects rather than from a purely flood protection perspective. Mr Todilokvech observed that local communities were more receptive to the smaller tributary storage schemes as there was a greater level of consultation and public participation in their planning. Even so, there is a need for better communication with local stakeholders and NGOs and there should be clarity on compensation issues for projects if they are to have a good chance of success. Public participation is a must and may require teams to be embedded in the local community to get acceptance. Decisions cannot be imposed on the community. Ms Sunan Tanarom, Director of Administration, DWR pointed out that under the ministerial regulation of 2007, the intention was for the RBCs to manage water resources in the basin by formulating river basin plans and requesting budgets. In practice though there is insufficient capacity to formulate such plans and they have to rely on external support. The annual budget of 2 million baht is inadequate and can only support 2 to 3 meetings a year. Government agencies do not pay attention to the RBCs and many do not attend the meetings as they are not perceived to be departmental functions or a priority. The mentality is still to think along sector lines and each agency tries to promote their own projects. As a result, the water management plans consist of individual projects stapled together without a basin wide perspective or application of IWRM principles. Allocation of budgets does not necessarily reflect the urgency or needs in the basin and on occasions, budgets are not spent according to the plans. The RBCs have no authority to enforce recommendations and need some legal status and support in the form of a Water Act. Dr Apichart Anukularmphai Senior Water Adviser, ADB reminded participants that the composition of RBCs has changed from when they were first set up to remove the representation bias towards government agencies and have a majority representation of local stakeholders and eminent persons. Also, the current national development plan highlights IWRM principles. But, the legal status of the RBCs needs to be strengthened as currently they have little authority especially when dealing with the private sector. The lack of legal status precludes allocation of more budget to the RBCs. Instead they have to go through the DWR. There needs to be a long term plan for the basin with long term budget allocation. The RBCs would benefit from seed money to test ideas on a local basis before they can be rolled out basin wide. The lack of a water law has impeded the work of the RBCs but existing laws may still be used. At the national level, there needs to be a balance between area and function planning. Panic and knee jerk reactions to water issues are not the solution and a holistic approach needs to be adopted for basin planning. Water is an economic resource and there is a cost to manage and supply the water which is often overlooked by stakeholders. Stakeholders need to understand their rights as well as responsibilities as often projects are not well maintained after construction. Other comments from the floor included: Stakeholders may be more open to considering options if the issue of compensation was openly addressed from the outset. Economic analysis should take account of post implementation costs. Even though there may be acceptance of the modified mainstream schemes with reduced storages, further analysis should be carried out to ensure that the schemes still fit the purpose and multiple uses. The RID has learnt from its experience on the Kaeng Sua Ten reservoir and work practices have changed significantly. Yet, a change in mindset may be needed as well across all agencies. 9

15 3 WRAP U P & NE XT STEPS (SESSIO N 8 ) Meelit Shah TA Team Leader, summarised the key outcomes of the workshop and the need for close cooperation between the various agencies to promote IWRM in Thailand. IWRM is a process and Thailand has made some progress in its implementation. There are many challenges as well as opportunities and this study will contribute towards achieving IWRM goals. Mr Shah highlighted the project deliverables and the planned training workshops over the second half of 2014 at national and Yom Basin level covering economic assessment, the use of SEAs in the water sector, social analysis and community consultation methods and river basin modelling. The IWRM workshop provided a unique forum for a broad range of government agencies, NGOs and the TA Team to discuss water management issues. The consultative workshop enabled the various agencies to learn from each other and understand how they can contribute towards achieving IWRM in Thailand. It provided an opportunity for building working relationships between senior staff. The format of the workshop with presentations, plenary sessions and panel sessions was appreciated by the participants with the Governor of Phrae commenting that It was the best workshop he had attended. The comments made during the workshop will be taken into account and where necessary, will be incorporated into the TA project activities. A priority agreed was the need for training workshops on various aspects of IWRM in the various sectors. The contents of the training workshops planned during the course of the TA 8267 project will be tailored to address the gaps in the knowledge base to strengthen the application of IWRM in Thailand.. 10