ANNEX II: TERMS OF REFERENCE. Water Governance in Central Asia

Transcription

1 ANNEX II: TERMS OF REFERENCE Water Governance in Central Asia

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Beneficiary countries Contracting Authority Relevant background Regional conditions Current state of affairs in the relevant sector International agreements and arrangements Summary of national water management status Commonalities and differences Related programmes and other donor activities European Union UN Programmes OECD EAP Task Force-programmes IFIs Others CONTRACT OBJECTIVES Overall objectives Specific objectives Results to be achieved Areas of intervention Specific results ASSUMPTIONS & RISKS Assumptions underlying the project intervention Risks SCOPE OF WORK General Objectives Project description Geographical area to be covered Target groups Specific activities Inception phase Implementation phase Completion phase CAREC activities Stakeholder and public participation Visibility Project management Responsible bodies Management structure Facilities to be provided by the Contracting Authority and/or other parties LOGISTICS AND TIMING Location Start date and period of execution REQUIREMENTS Personnel Key experts Other experts...39

3 6.1.3 Support staff & backstopping Office accommodation Facilities to be provided by the Consultant Equipment Incidental expenditure Expenditure verification REPORTS Reporting requirements Formal reporting Technical reports Submission & approval of reports MONITORING AND EVALUATION Definition of indicators Immediate results Longer term results Special requirements...43

4 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AP Tacis Action Programme CA Central Asia CA IP Central Asia Indicative Programme for CAREC Central Asia Regional Environmental Center CASP Central Asia Strategy Paper CACO Central Asia Cooperation Organisation EAP European Action Programme EC European Commission EECCA Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia EQS Emission Quality Standard EU European Union EU WI European Union Water Initiative EURASEC Eurasian Economic Community EPSOO Convention on Endangered Plans and Species GEF Global Environment Fund GFATM Global Fund IFAS International Fund for the Aral Sea IP Indicative programme (EU) IPPC Integrated Pollution Permitting and Control (EU) IWRM Integrated Water Resource Management OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development OSCE Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe PCA Partnership and Cooperation Agreement PDF A/B Project Development Facility, phase A or B (UN projects) REPIN Regulatory Environmental Programme Implementation Network RBMP River Basin Management Plan or Planning SAP Strategic Action Plan (UN) SIA Sustainable impact assessment SWQS Surface Water Quality Standards UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNECE United Nations European Economic Commission UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNSCR United Nations Security Council Resolution WB World Bank WTO World Trade Organisation

5 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1.1 Beneficiary countries The beneficiary countries are Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. The five together are referred to as the project countries. 1.2 Contracting Authority The contracting authority is the European Commission. 1.3 Relevant background Regional conditions Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan belong to the Central Asia region which is characterised by varied geography, including high passes and mountains (Tian Shan), vast deserts (Kara Kum, Kyzyl Kum, Taklamakan), and steppes. Major rivers of the region include the Amu Darya and the Syr Darya. Major bodies of water include the Aral Sea and Lake Balkhash. Both of these bodies of water have shrunk significantly in recent decades due to diversion of water from rivers that feed them for irrigation and industrial purposes. Water is an extremely valuable resource in Central Asia. The majority of the territory has an arid or semi-arid climate, and irrigated agriculture accounts for about % of total water use. The most challenging issues for Central Asia are increasing water deficiencies (that are aggravated by problems of resource distribution between countries and inefficient use of that resource), and degradation of aquatic ecosystems. In general, it can be stated, as it was done at the 2005 general meeting of the Interstate Coordination Water Commission (ICWC) that the main problems of Trans-boundary Water Resources management in Central Asia are caused by the contradiction between the interests of the upstream countries (Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan), concerned with the operation of large hydro power stations in energy regime and further development of the hydroelectric potential, and downstream countries (Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan), concerned with sustainable functioning of irrigation infrastructure and protection of their own territories from floods. At present, water resources are not managed in an integrated way in the CA region. The old arrangements established during the USSR period were aligned vertically and were mainly integrated on a political level during the central government in Moscow. When the central coordinating role was removed by the break-up of the USSR, it was not successfully replaced in all the newly independent countries. Bilateral and multilateral agreements adopted since independence (see 1.4.1) regulate mainly water allocation and power issues, whereas the environment is not adequately addressed. The seriousness of water and environmental issues has been widely recognised by the countries of the region and they have responded with reforms to improve performance (such as adopting basin management principles). Several countries have taken steps to towards the implementation of IWRM by amending the original Water Codes that they inherited from the Soviet Union. For example, the current Water Codes of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyz Republic make provision for the implementation of a number of IWRM principles, from basin management to environmental releases. Nevertheless the reforms undertaken by the countries remain at an early stage. At present, countries tend to establish principles for action (general water and environment codes, for 1

6 example) rather than define specific practical steps (the adoption and implementation of regulation, for example). The future effectiveness of reform will depend on overcoming such difficulties this is the purpose of this project. 1.4 Current state of affairs in the relevant sector At the international level, discussions about resource allocation are held at the highest political level. Nationally, quantity and quality matters are managed by different ministries or equivalent institutions. For quantity management, these are generally ministries of agriculture or agencies under their aegis, controlling the resource primarily for irrigation purposes. Quality is controlled by environment ministries or agencies. Structures and mechanisms for water management therefore exist. The issue is to ensure that they work together at international, national and local levels to achieve the improvement objectives that they recognise as necessary International agreements and arrangements United Nations Conventions The UN ECE Helsinki Convention on trans-boundary rivers and lakes set the principles for an ecological sustainable use of transboundary waters, requiring its parties to use an integrated approach in its national and local practices as well. However among Central Asian Countries, only Kazakhstan has ratified the Helsinki Convention (in January 2001). Central Asian countries have preferred to define their own agreements, rather than ratifying existing international ones. The 5 countries are parties to the UN Convention to combat desertification and to the UN Convention to Preserve Biological Diversity. Regional Agreements Bilateral or multilateral agreements may cover general trans-national issues between the countries (as for example agreements between Kazakhstan and China, or Kazakhstan and Russia), or may concern specific water basins issues (Syr- and Amudarya, for instance, or Chu and Talas rivers). The Agreement on cooperation in joint management, use and protection of interstate sources of water resources signed in Almaty in February 1992 by all 5 CA countries. In 1993 the Central Asia leaders concluded the «Agreement for Joint Actions Aimed at Solution of the Aral Sea Problem and Environment Rehabilitation and Social-Economic Development of the Aral Sea Region» which provided a basis for addressing this environmental catastrophe. The Nukus Declaration (1995) acknowledged the formulation of the Aral Sea Basin Sustainable Development Convention as a high priority. In 1997 four countries (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan) concluded an agreement on cooperation in the field of prevention and mitigation of emergency situations. In March 1998, an «Agreement for Cooperation in the field of Environment and Rational Use of Nature» was signed by the governments of same four countries. The Framework Convention on the Environment for Sustainable Development in Central Asia (previously for Aral Basin), developed under the Interstate Sustainable development Committee, is signed by 3 countries, and will be signed by the 2 remaining (Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan) by the end of The international legal basis for transboundary water management is not static and is in process of development. The CA countries have adopted the Programme of Concrete 2

7 Actions for improvement of Environmental and Socio-Economic Conditions in the Aral Sea Basin for This programme foresees the development of the draft interstate agreements on various aspects of transboundary water management. Regional arrangements The International Fund for the Aral Sea saving (IFAS) was founded in 1993 by the 5 countries. An Executive Committee was established in 1997 as its working organ. It has a three-year rotating presidency and supporting secretariat which is in Kyrgyzstan from 1st July The Interstate Commission for Water Coordination (ICWC) was established in Tashkent in 1992 as a support to the Agreement on cooperation in joint management, use and protection of interstate sources of water resources. The ICWC scope of responsibilities is primarily limited to water allocation functions. The ICWC includes two Basin Water Management organisations (for Syrdaria and Amurdarya rivers), and a Scientific Information Centre. The Interstate Sustainable Development Commission (ISDC) was established in 1994 by the five countries. It has played an important role supporting the UN ECE Central Asian Initiative on Sustainable Development, prepared for World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg (2002), by ensuring its ownership by each of its countries. Both ICWC and ISDC are structures under the umbrella of IFAS. The Central Asian Regional Environment Centre (CAREC) was established following the decision of the 4th Pan European Conference Environment for Europe (Aarhus, 1998), on the initiative of the CA states. In 2001, it starts its activities, with headquarters in Almaty, and branch offices in each country. Similarly to other RECs established in Central and Eastern Europe, it is a non for profit organization to support dialogue between NGOS, governments and businesses. Regional Institutional Deficiencies There are discrepancies between mandates and current practices of regional structures. The decisions are often country - or sector -oriented. For instance, water quality consideration is not part of the water allocation procedure. Despite of its current political mandate, IFAS cannot play effectively a role of regional organisation enable to accommodate the differing positions and sometimes conflicting interests of the various States, sectors and agencies. Regardless of the fact that ICWC and ICSD have the same statute under IFAS umbrella, ICSD has much less favourable organisational and financial possibilities Summary of national water management status Kazakhstan Kazakhstan is the largest country in Central Asia with a population of 15.1 Million (2005). Due to revenue from its fuel and oil product exports, Kazakhstan has maintained an intensive rate of economic growth (9.7% GDP growth in 2005) (World Bank). This has made it the most prosperous state in the region. Recently there has been a building up of political will to reform environmental management and the water sector. In the environment sector, Kazakhstan s long-term strategy ( Kazakhstan 2030 ) develops the concept of transition towards sustainable development 3

8 for the period This strategic document is based on the principles of intersectoral integration, systemic approach to the management of the state, territorial development on the basis of a trans-regional ecosystem approach. It fixes the priorities on the regional problems of sustainable development, access to quantitative drinking water and the solution of trans-boundary environmental problems. The Kazakh government is reforming and increasing its environmental legislation in alignment with international conventions such as Environment for Europe, World Summit in Johannesburg, Millennium Development Goals and the Water Initiative. The latest political documents (viz. Strategy of Kazakhstan Development till 2030, Governmental Program for , Water Code 2003, Concept of Ecological Safety 2003, Concept of Law Reforming in the field of Environmental Protection, Environmental Code 2006) all show the need and the political will for deep general and sector reforms to meet the challenges of a liberal market economy. These documents and initiatives contain the framework for a new system of management, but still require implementing texts and regulation to bring into operation. Within this context, Kazakhstan has already made significant progress on the implementation of Integrated Water Resources Management. A basin management approach was introduced through the Water Code. Since then, Kazakhstan has seen numerous water basin management initiatives covering virtually the whole country and involving all its neighbours. The territory was divided in eight river basins - Aral-Syrdariya, Balkhash-Alakol, Irtysh-Yesil, Zhayik-Caspian, Nura-Sarysui, Tobol-Torgai, Shu-Talas. A number of river basin organisations have been established. Basin councils are in the process of establishment; five have been created so far. Economic instruments for water management such as polluter-payer and user-payer have been developed and partially introduced. The reinforcement of financial and economic instruments to support the process is seen as an important part of this process. The Kazakhstan started the change from soviet-style norms and standards towards those more consonant with EU requirements. For instance, Kazakhstan is considering a system of Maximum Permissible Hazardous Impact (MPHI) aiming to establish limits values for water use (in the sense of recipient for pollution). Identified problems (but not limited to): Despite of significant efforts in developing primary environmental and water legislation, implementation, enforcement and compliance are all weak There remains a lack of goal-oriented policy to enable more responsibility for the managing institutions. There is a confusion of responsibilities for water management and a lack of understanding of its key ideas: resource protection means ensuring availability for economic use (energy, irrigation especially). The concepts of water ecosystems or ecological quality are not yet developed in existing legislation The Water Resources Committee, a subordinate structure of the Ministry of Agriculture, does not have the capacity to manage the present system let alone put IWRM principles into practice on its own. It lacks the active support of reinforced local and regional administrations as well as other governmental institutions. 4

9 There were several projects implemented in Kazakhstan, which include components, planned for in the Water Governance project. These consultative works of different scales were not used until now; mainly because of the lack of political will and absence of clear vision on how to reform environmental management and the water sector. Kyrgyzstan The Kyrgyz Republic is a mostly mountainous country that lies in the east of the Central Asian region. It is an important water reservoir for the other countries in the region. It has a population of approximately 5.1 million (2005) with a relatively small agricultural and industrial base. The country has made considerable progress in attaining macroeconomic stability in the past few years with average GDP growing at about 5 percent a year since 1996, but however remains one of the poorest in the world with 40% of the population below the poverty line (World Bank 2005). With respect to the environment, the Kyrgyz Republic has undertaken the obligations formulated by the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development and UN Millennium Development Goals. On a national level, a draft Environment Code has been submitted to Parliament. The Republic continues to work with the UNDP to strengthen the national capacity for environmental management; and to meet obligations under international agreements in the field of sustainable development and environmental protection; promoting Millennium Development Goals; introducing and implementing Local Agenda 21; establishing a platform for dialogue to discuss approaches to sound management of natural resources, intersectoral /agency cooperation, integration of these issues into national strategies and programmes on state and local levels. Efforts for water reforms in Kyrgyzstan are being led by the Ministry of Agriculture in the following key areas: A new Water Code was adopted in It is a comprehensive and modern piece of legislation, which reflects best practice and international experience. It includes recognised basic principles such as: Integrated Water Resources Management; the consolidation of water resources; and the organisation of management functions under a new, single top-level government water administration that is assisted by a new highlevel council of senior government officials who provide policy direction and supervision. Water management through water users associations, which presently cover over two thirds of the republic s irrigated land, coupled with associations managing irrigation structures. Continuation of reforms initiated in 1994 to improved efficiency through market mechanisms, including the institutionalisation of payment for water. The implementation of IWRM in the Kyrgyz Republic has been supported by several projects that have shown successful and replicable results (refer to section 1.5). Overall, the situation in Kyrgyzstan can still be characterised as unstable due to frequent disagreement between the government and the Parliament, in addition to poor economic and social infrastructure and poverty. The new legislation remains strongly influenced by the practices of the former Soviet Union republics. 5

10 No integrated water resources and water efficiency plans have yet been developed despite the fact that Kyrgyzstan has undertaken to meet these obligations. Identified problems (but not limited to): The new Water Code of 2006 has not abrogated the water law of 1995 and conflicts between them appear to exist. There is a considerable gap between the existing situation and the institutional arrangements that will have to be put into place after the enactment of the new Water Code, an arduous task for the Government of Kyrgyzstan, which does not possess all the (human and financial) resources needed. Conflicting provisions of the water laws concerning responsibilities and procedures for permitting and enforcement, where multiple management institutions are involved and have rights (Health, Emergency Situations, for example). Pollution permitting procedures are weak and no permits are said to have been issued since The creation, implementation and sustainability of WUAs and associations managing irrigation structures lacks a national framework and enabling legislation. Tajikistan Tajikistan is a land-locked country with a population of around 6.6 million. The mountains of Tajikistan are the source of a significant share of the waters used by the Central Asian countries, including over half the Aral Sea s inflow, most of which is snow and glacier melt. During the five-year civil war that began in 1992, following the break-up of the Soviet Union, Tajikistan s economy lost more than 50 percent of its GDP. The country also suffered widespread physical and human damage. However, it began to recover from 1998 with peace, political and macroeconomic stabilisation enabling the Government to focus on administering the country and implementing the economic and social development agenda (World Bank). In Tajikistan, where the economy of is presently growing rapidly (6.7% GDP growth 2005, World Bank), it is increasingly important to make sure that natural resources are managed and used in a sustainable way. Internally, the intention is to transform water management to IWRM principles on a basin approach. This approach is stated in a number of strategic documents recently adopted in the country. In 2005 the President of the Republic of Tajikistan called for the drafting of a National Development Strategy (NDS). As Tajikistan s principal strategic document it puts forward an orderly and MDG-based long-term development process throughout National Environmental Action Plan focused on the integration of environmental concerns with economic, fiscal and sectoral policies was developed in With the support of UNDP, the Government of Tajikistan has recently developed its strategy for the Water sector. The Water Code of Tajikistan stipulates that water management is to be organised on the basis of hydrological basins. The Government has demonstrated commitment to water-related issues and intends to adopt IWRM principles with a basin approach, bringing it closer to users. The key beneficiaries of this process should be irrigators and small towns and rural areas without adequate domestic water supply or sanitation. It is currently implementing the Programme of Fresh Water in Rehabilitation of the water supply network has focused on 6

11 irrigation and the provision of drinking water. The Government sees the reform of water quality standards and accompanying regulatory and institutional change as the prerequisite for improvement. Tajikistan states that it will need to ensure that the bodies responsible for water cooperate in developing a coherent approach to current resource and quality management issues. An important component of the reform will be to ensure payment for water use (abstraction and pollution) including economic incentives for sustainable behaviour. This will require changes to the tax code and therefore the involvement of the Ministry of Finance. Identified problems (but not limited to): Water management responsibilities remain spread between a large number of institutions, including the Ministry of Land Reclamation and Water Resources, the Ministry of Agriculture and Environmental Protection (for surface water quality), the Geological management Authority (for groundwater), Ministry of Energy (HEP), Ministry of Health Care (drinking water) and a Sate Unitary Enterprise with three subordinate institutions responsible for water supply and sanitation management: the capital, urban and rural areas. All the interlocutors pointed to the following problems in the water sector: Institutional weakness of the Ministry of Water Resources because of lack of the human and technical resources Lack of inter-sectoral cooperation eg between Ministry of Water Resources dealing with irrigation and the ministries of agriculture, industry, economy, energy and nature protection Lack of effective mechanisms to finance operation and maintenance of irrigation and other water management infrastructure Lack of an effective hydrological monitoring system, data collection, processing and distribution / communication. The main problems at the basin level are: inadequate mechanisms for joint water and energy resource management between basin stakeholders, including mechanisms for prevention and resolution of conflict in dry years; Absence of coherent criteria and means for creating bilateral and multilateral agreements on the use of water and energy resources in compliance with framework agreements. Uzbekistan Sharing a border with all of the four other countries involved in this programme, Uzbekistan is the most populous country in the region (26.2 million). During the Soviet period, agriculture and namely irrigated cotton production was developed and became the dominant economic activity. It remains so today accounting for 28% of GDP and around 30% of employment (World Bank 2005). In this connexion, the single biggest concern for Uzbekistan is the acquisition of adequate water for agricultural use. 80% of supplies are from external sources and 20% from own groundwater reserves. Downstream mineralisation (especially salt) is unacceptably high and affects the Aral Sea as well as irrigation potential. 7

12 At present, agriculture is undergoing the third stage of reforms on transition to market relations. There is intensive agricultural re-structuring: private farms are being formed on the basis of former collective farms. This process of re-structuring predetermined and made for reforms in water sector. The main aim of government policy in the water sector is to promote the rational use of water and to protect water resources. Better management, more sustainable and less polluting use of water for irrigation and other uses, especially for cotton and other cash crop sectors is recognised as essential, but improvements are slow in coming. Particularly, introduction of water charges, better control of water abstraction, as well as farmer education, are needed. At present water management is regulated by the Uzbek Law of Water and Water Use (1993). A new Water Code is currently being prepared. It also aims to improve the efficiency and reliability of the country s water sector management, ensuring guaranteed water delivery and providing essential services both to society and natural ecosystems. In general, state water reforms favour the adoption of IWRM principles, transitioning from centralised management to a more hydrographical approach based on basin units and the creation of Water user associations (WUAs). Environment policy has been successful in a number or areas: Environmental Impact Assessments have been introduced, protected areas identified and a waste register established. Waste water discharges to the Aral Sea have been halved since National monitoring coordination aims at surface and ground water resource maintenance. Identified problems (but not limited to): The division of responsibilities between water management for irrigation and for quality control is as sharp as in the neighbouring countries. The problem is exacerbated by a strong vertical approach to information collection and storage, making effective planning impossible. Uzbekistan hosts at permanent basis all working and executive bodies of ICWC (two Basin Water Management organisations (for Syrdaria and Amurdarya rivers), and SIC- ICWC). As results of this some decisions taken by ICWC are country-oriented and not sufficiently respond to basin management needs. The absence of rotation is criticised by other ICWC members. The established basin management authorities are in effect irrigation infrastructure managers of which each manage several irrigation basins whose infrastructure is of several different designs and generally in need of investment. Administrations prefer to avoid external aid in legislative reform and regulatory issues, these last considering as strictly internal affairs of Uzbekistan. The EU Commission reoriented and reduced the allocation to Uzbekistan under the Tacis programme. Financing issues may have an impact on the level of Uzbek participation in this project. Turkmenistan Turkmenistan is located in the south-west of Central Asia with a population of approximately 4.8 million (2005). It has a highly specialised economy, which largely depends on export of natural gas, oil and cotton. Turkmenistan shows positive economic performance 8

13 for the last ten years. It has been experiencing steady positive growth during However, it is mostly dependent on its relations with neighbouring countries through which the export routes pass. Despite steady economic development and natural gas and oil export earnings, little progress was made in the implementation of economic reforms, as well as water sector reforms. As a signatory to Agenda 21 and the Johannesburg Summit on Sustainable Development and the Millennium Development Goals, Turkmenistan has signalled its intention to work towards Integrated Water Resources Management. Water management in Turkmenistan is currently managed by the 2004 Water Code that regulates water abstraction, transport and use to promote the development of the economy. Reform has been announced, consisting of transferring responsibility from central planning to irrigation basin management (noting that the same central authorities remain responsible for irrigation basin management). There currently exists a Strategy of socio-economic transformation in Turkmenistan until 2010 that foresees a range of measures for ecological security provision. It s main priorities being the following: harmonising industrial development with environment protection; prevention of Aral sea catastrophe consequences and high water quality assurance; pollution control in agriculture; combating land salinisation and erosion; and emission reduction. A later national Strategy of Economic, Political and Cultural Development of Turkmenistan until 2020 has also been adopted in order to reflect all environmental and resource use concerns. Food security is at the heart of the latest plan. A National Environment Action Plan (NEAP) was adopted in 2002, its environmental policies and practices are being supported by the UNDP (refer to section 1.5). Water availability (for irrigation) is increasing thanks to significant investment in new dams (in cooperation with Iran), exploitation of ground water sources and the construction of a pipe whose capacity is sufficient for export as well as domestic use. Identified problems (but not limited to): Turkmenistan s political system and decision-making structures has remained highly centralised and been characterised by a strong presidency during the tenure of the late President Saparmurat Niyazov, who passed away in December International and regional cooperation for water management has been limited until now. The country remains relatively closed and difficult to work in. Turkmenistan is now at the starting point on the way to reforming their water sector and moving towards IWRM. At present, there is very limited mention of integrated approaches to water management in national policies and texts.the division of responsibilities between water management for irrigation and for quality control is as sharp as in the neighbouring countries Commonalities and differences The project countries have provided information on recent projects in the sector and an indication of the directions they wish to see the project taking. Despite differences in emphasis, there are important similarities which mean that there are good grounds for comparison and debate about appropriate common approaches to water governance improvements. 9

14 Transition of the water sector to a governance system based on IWRM principles is in progress in just about all countries. Some countries are already on the way towards practical implementation of more integrated approaches to water resources development, management and use (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic), but others have only taken initial steps in this direction. All countries have undertaken reforms in the water sector. Despite of the essential progress, many problems remain unresolved: All countries recent (post-2000) water codes that provide management frameworks, but these are not adequately implemented through appropriate regulation and they do not seem to overcome the lack of relationship between quality and quantity management issues. In the institutional sphere, there has been much re-arrangement of ministries and responsibilities within each country but the result has not generally improved the coordination of monitoring or management of water resources. Decision-making responsibilities are distributed amongst a number of different institutions which do not coordinate effectively What is generally missing is a formal plan for coordination set out in a IWRM and Water Efficiency plan (or River Basin Plan, as required by the EU Framework Directive). Procedures for the elaboration, adoption and implementation of basin plans as well as their legal status are not clearly defined The countries use quality standards inherited from the Soviet Union which generally represent ideal rather than practical values often cannot be met; Information derived from monitoring or from permitting and enforcement processes not always sufficient or correctly aggregated to provide a realistic picture of the current situation and its evolution and is rarely used for planning and decision-making. Despite of the reform progress, all countries nevertheless remain bound by the Soviet and immediate post-soviet period agreements on resource allocation which have tended to restrict the extent of change, especially in international relations. Regardless similar economic and institutional problems, and despite often cited highlevel intra-regional initiatives for cooperation, the five countries of Central Asia have gradually taken diverging paths in their foreign and domestic policies, and political, economic and civil society development. In water resource terms, the most obvious is between the small mountain reservoir countries and the large, predominantly lowland, user countries. Another significant difference within these two groups in terms of the uneven distribution of energy resources: hydrocarbons in Kazakhstan but less in Uzbekistan; HEP developed in Kyrgyzstan but less in Tajikistan, for example. In terms of progress on IWRM, the countries can be considered in two main groups, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan where progress on IWRM is being made and who are open to reform, within limits, and who collaborate on international projects on the environment and more specifically water management; and Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan where reform is proceeding more slowly or is now just beginning. 10

15 Summary of CA country progress on IWRM Country Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Tajikistan Uzbekistan Assessment IWRM introduced, wants practical implementation in alignment with the WFD Progress being made on IWRM, strong reform progress, numerous cooperation projects under way and planned Progress being made on IWRM, water reform process started, numerous cooperation projects under way and planned Limited progress on IWRM, Administrations express interest in water sector reform Turkmenistan No progress on IWRM, Administrations express interest in water sector reform It means that the project response will need to be tailored to individual country needs. 1.5 Related programmes and other donor activities The international community has been very active in supporting water sector reform in the region since 1990, especially but by no means only concerned with the reversal of the deterioration of the Aral Sea. Numerous multi-lateral and bilateral projects have been and continue to be implemented. The following overview does not pretend to be complete but rather to illustrate the range of recent and current activities that must be taken into account in project implementation European Union The new framework for EU cooperation policy with Central Asian countries is described in the EU and Central Asia Strategy for a new Partnership adopted in May Environmental sustainability and water are one of the selected priority issues for cooperation. The EU will therefore further support the implementation of the EU Water Initiative (EUWI) in this region for safe water supply (Millennium Development Goals) and integrated water resources management and promote and support a set of actions with various partners covering institutional, technical and financial aspects of water management, forests management, climate change, desertification and biodiversity, environmental awareness and civil society development. The recent EU technical assistance in the Central Asia with respect to water governance has mainly focused either on support to the International Fund for Saving the Aral Sea or on Cross-border cooperation through several projects. These projects stressed on the water quality and quantity monitoring, the development of action plans and strategies and the strengthening of the institutions involved. The Tacis Joint Rivers Management Programme did deal with water quality monitoring in a transboundary context. The Tacis project Support for Regional Water Management and Strengthening the Capacity of Basin Water Organisations for Improved Resources Planning (ASREWAM) was carried out in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan and dealt with water management. In Kazakhstan, the Tacis/CAREC project Development of Ithe Integrated Management Plan for Ili-Balkhash basin was a first example of the introduction of ecosystem management and supported elaborating a system of Maximum Permissible Hazardous Impact. 11

16 At the time of writing the Tacis environment is under preparation project in Kazakhstan. The project aims to promote the sustainable use and management of natural resources and specifically to increase the efficiency of environmental management structures. The project is expected to look at the development of action plans for reforming the regulatory and economic policy instruments which could bring the most tangible and cost-effective impact for improvement of the environmental situation in the short to medium term UN Programmes Central Asian countries have initiated and established a UN Special Programme for the Economies of Central Asia in 1998 as a dynamic platform for improved regional cooperation at the highest level. One of the six Project Working Groups established, is the PWG on Water and Energy which plays a key role in establishing institutionalised cooperation between the countries on transboundary energy and water resources issues (for example for the cooperation on the Chu-Talas rivers). UNDP UNDP has a set of inter-related projects for the Central Asian region aiming to support integrated water resource management work in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The first project was the UNDP National IWRM and Water Efficiency Plan for Kazakhstan brought important progress on IWRM, and the new ones were developed in a similar way. Measures to have Uzbekistan participate in some actions are foreseen. In Kazakhstan an ongoing UNDP project Support for the Implementation of the Concept on Transition of the Republic of Kazakhstan to Sustainable Development aims at enhancing the capacity of the Ministry of Environment in implementing this concept. In Kyrgyzstan a UNDP project on Capacity Building and Environmental Governance Strengthening for Sustainable Development also provides support to implementing sustainable development concepts. In Turkmenistan UNDP is carrying a project on Institutional and Human Capacity Building for Better Environmental Governance, to support the development of environmental legislation, and environmental information management. In this country UNDP also gives inputs to developing national water management capacities and reinforcing regional cooperation. UNECE UNECE is the secretariat for the Helsinki Convention and leads a number of activities promoting its implementation, including the Capacity for Water Cooperation (CWC) network which organises training and seminars on aspects of trans-boundary water management; the UNECE will also be taking a major role in IWRM implementation in the framework of the EUWI. Its CWC project is intended to strengthen the capacity of transboundary water management in the EECCA. The objective of the project is to create a framework for cross-fertilisation and exchange of experience between river basins on regulatory, institutional, methodological and other aspects of integrated management. It also aims to establish a network of EECCA experts involved in transboundary water management who are used to cooperating and sharing knowledge OECD EAP Task Force-programmes The OECD s Environment Directorate is providing the Secretariat for the EAP Task Force of the Environment for Europe process. In this context it supports EECCA countries in 12

17 achieving the following objectives of the Environmental Partnership Strategy for EECCA countries: Reform of the urban water supply and sanitation sector, Public environmental finance, Effective and efficient environmental policy (implemented in the framework of the Regulatory Environmental Programme Implementation Network REPIN ) The REPIN network is of particular value in the context of the present project because it provides EECCA policy makers and practitioners with a platform to exchange experience and build partnerships with their counterparts from OECD countries, Central and Eastern Europe, as well as with representatives of NGOs and the private sector Its members have participated in the preparation of a number of guidance documents in fields of direct interest for water governance, such as principles of enforcement, of effective permitting systems, selfmonitoring and reporting, strengthening compliance, and performance measurement IFIs The Asian Development Bank is also providing support to REPIN for the effective implementation of environmental laws leading to improved environment and health conditions for the poor. According to the ADB, Its purpose is to strengthen institutional and practitioner capacity, improve citizen participation in environmental compliance and enforcement, and capture and share innovative solutions and best environmental compliance and enforcement models in the region. The World Bank recently started a Water Management Improvement project in Kyrgyzstan. This project covers a broad range of issues including institutional development, legal issues, establishment and capacity building of new institutions such as the National Water Council and the State Water Administration. The EIB is expected to play an increasing role in financing projects of interest to the EU in Central Asia Others Since 2002 the OSCE joined forces with UNEP, UNDP and other UN Agencies and NGOs in the Environment and Security Initiative (ENVSEC) to promote environmental management as a strategy for reducing insecurity. An in-depth assessment of environment and security risks in the Ferghana Valley was completed in 2005, and offered the ground for an extensive work programme focusing on land and water management, hazards, and biodiversity issues. Projects on natural disasters mitigation, capacity building for laboratories are also carried out in the border regions of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. In Uzbekistan and Tajikistan OSCE is also leading environmental initiatives on environmental security issues. Central Asia Regional Water Information Base Project (CAREWIB) aims at the improvement of information provision in water and environmental sectors in Central Asian countries in order to promote transparency openness and foster public support for rational natural resources use. The project is implemented by SIC ICWC in Tashkent with support from UNECE and UNEP/GRID-Arendal with financial support of Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). 13

18 2 CONTRACT OBJECTIVES 2.1 Overall objectives The overall objective of the project is to contribute to the reduction of pollution, to fair sharing and effective use of scarce water resources, to improve the quality of shared water resources such as transboundary rivers, through the improvement, implementation and enforcement of water legislation approximated to EU standards. 2.2 Specific objectives The objective of this project is to provide further advancement of IWRM already initiated in the beneficiary countries that have been created by previous projects and other initiatives, including those mentioned before. The project aims in supporting water management improvement in the CA countries through practical support to reinforce regulatory and institutional mechanisms. Support on creation of competent basin authorities (basin management structures, basin councils) does not enter in the project objectives, this area of intervention being largely supported by UNDP-led IWRM activities and other initiatives in the region (see 1.5). The project focus is on developing the integrated water management approaches, by the means of: reinforcing the water basin management planning through regulatory and institutional measures; promoting the reform of water quality standards as a tool to improve the information base for water management and basin planning, using the EU water framework directive (WFD) as a reference framework. Specifically, the project aims to assist the development of: legislative and regulatory framework that establishes procedures of water management planning, promoting a coherent and integrated approach to water management bringing together quality and quantity issues; appropriate economic mechanisms targeted at economic operators in line with IWRM principles; a practical system of water quality standards, and legislation, regulation or other instruments, including economic mechanisms, that enable the use of these standards in IWRM; legislative and regulatory framework that reinforces procedures of inter-institutional coordination, ensuring compatible approach and enabling the recognition of procedures and results of one institution by another, both within and between countries; the participation of user groups in the decision-making process. The work has two dimensions: country-specific activities that promote good practice nationally, and; 14

19 regional activities helping to ensure that approaches to integrated water management are compatible and mutually comprehensible in all project countries, and also to cater to international agreements. In doing so, the project will promote a coherent and consistent approach to water management bringing together quality and quantity issues. It will also support the further development of cooperation among countries, water and environment sectors on improvement of management systems and legal and regulatory framework in the area of water quality taking into account EU WFD and international experience. More precise objectives are mentioned with each task in section Results to be achieved Areas of intervention The project is concerned with achieving progress in IWRM implementation. Results will be achieved in legislative, institutional and technical areas at national and regional level: Legislative and regulatory development that enables the practical implementation of target-oriented basin management plans as well as integrated management plans; Institutional building, including definition of institution responsibilities and procedure, for IWRM planning and plan implementation, based on reinforced management practices and improved information; Development of a system of water quality standards that correspond to international and, specifically, to WFD requirements, taking into account local conditions in each country Specific results Concrete results achieved in each project country may differ according to IWRM implementation progress. The expected country-specific results to enable the beneficiary countries to create the conditions for IWRM implementation are: Implementation and regulatory initiatives supporting water and environment codes that enable IWRM planning and plan implementation; Provisions on institutional arrangements that enable IWRM planning, including mechanisms for stakeholder participation; Proposals for new water quality standards and norms for integrated water management in CA countries; Supporting the development of appropriate economic mechanisms in line with IWRM principles, including incentive schemes where appropriate; Procedures for inter-institutional coordination, ensuring compatible approaches and enabling the recognition of the water monitoring procedures and results of one institution by another Capacity building of water and environmental managers from partner institutions; 15

20 The expected results of regional dimension are: Better cooperation between countries through the existing regional structures; Reinforcement of the existing regional structures that help practical implementation of regional and international agreements and conventions. 3 ASSUMPTIONS & RISKS 3.1 Assumptions underlying the project intervention All the project countries have made policy statements to the effect that that they aim to develop and apply integrated water management procedures. Kazakhstan has gone further and started the process, but there as in the other countries, difficulties of adopting appropriate (implementing) legislation, getting the main players to work to the same goals and providing the necessary funds and materials make practical realisation difficult. The central assumption of the project is that the policy aim remains and countries are prepared to make an effort to overcome these recognised weaknesses. Practice in the project countries is to provide procedural direction and detailed attributions to implementing institutions through regulation and other binding texts. The second assumption is that they are prepared make progress in their adoption, enabling practical work to be undertaken to reinforce environmental management systems for water. Institutional responsibilities are vertically organised and inter-institutional work is difficult to achieve on a regular basis. The project assumes that moves are made to break down these and related barriers in order to make progress on integrated approaches to water management. Finally, the establishment of an effective monitoring and information exchange network supporting BVU or other institutions that have permitting, control and monitoring responsibilities presupposes adequate staff levels and skills, which in turn supposes adequate incentives to work in the field (salaries, security and other conditions of employment, prospects, materials in BVU and related institutions and their laboratories). 3.2 Risks Project risks are tied to the non-fulfilment of the assumptions outlined above. Of these, the political risk of a change of orientation is the most serious in the sense that it would undermine project purpose, but appears the least likely because the governments appear committed to continued reform in the sector, given the risks to supply and quality in the event of continued unsustainable use strategies. The most serious real risk is that of inertia, where institutional practices of vertically organised responsibility and secrecy amongst other things do not change, even where legislation would appear to make it necessary. In this event, project outputs could be of little practical value since change is a precondition for more effective management processes. Finally, success in implementation does depend to an extent on increased resources being allocated to the sector. Failure to provide them will limit the capacity for change and improvement and delay the rehabilitation or reform of systems sorely tried by underinvestment in the past 15 years and more. 16