River Basin Management: Its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects

Transcription

1 WCD Thematic Reviews Institutional Processes: V.3 River Basin Management: Its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects Draft: 8 January 2000 Prepared for the WCD by: P Millington DRAFT (NOT FOR CIRCULATION OR CITATION) World Commission on Dams Secretariat P.O. Box 16002, Vlaeberg, Cape Town 8018, South Africa Phone: Fax: Website: info@dams.org

2 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects ii Disclaimer This is a working paper of the World Commission on Dams - the report published herein was prepared for the Commission as part of its information gathering activity. The views, conclusions, and recommendations are not intended to represent the views of the The Commission's views, conclusions, and recommendations will be set forth in the Commission's own report. World Commission on Dams 5 th Floor, Hycastle House 58 Loop Street PO Box Vlaeberg, Cape Town 8018, SOUTH AFRICA Telephone: Fax: info@dams.org

3 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects iii Contents Acronyms...iv Preface... v Executive Summary...vii 1. Introduction Elements of Good Integrated Water Resources Management River Basin Management The Setting The River Basin A Logical Managing Unit? Basin Organisations - What Evolutionary forms can they take? Problems in Managing River Basins River Basin Management in the Real World Is it Working? Questionnaire on River Basin performance International Experience The Role of the International Convention on Non-Navigable Uses of Watercourses Is it contributing to good Basin management? Country and Regional Overview Lessons for the Future - Using Best Practice for Basin Water Planning and Management Basin wide Cooperation Data Generation and Modelling Bibliography. 39 Annex 1 40 Annex 2 67 Annex 3 74

4 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects iv Acronyms ICPR IWRM MDBC MRC RBDA RBO SADC TVA ZAC PLAN International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine Integrated Water Resources Management Murray Darling Basin Commission Mekong River Commission River Basin Development Authorities River Basin Organisation South African Development Community Tennessee Valley Authority Zambesi River Action Plan

5 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects v Preface The World Commission on Dams (WCD) was established to address central issues of the controversy with respect to large dams and their effectiveness in sustainable development. The Commission s overarching goals are: To review the development effectiveness of dams and assess alternatives for water resources and energy development To develop internationally acceptable standards, guidelines and criteria for decision making in the planning, design, construction, monitoring, operation and decommissioning of dams. Established through a process involving representatives from all sides of the debate, the WCD sets a new precedent for addressing conflicting views in the context of the international debate on sustainable development. The WCD is thus uniquely positioned to bring into focus the many assumptions and paradigms which are at the centre of the search to reconcile economic growth, social equity, environmental sustainability, good governance and public participation in the changing global context of development. The WCD Work Program presents the rationale and approach for developing a comprehensive base of shared knowledge necessary to produce the three defined major outputs: Output 1: A global review of the development effectiveness of large dams; Output 2: A framework for options-assessments and decision-making processes; Output 3: A set of internationally acceptable criteria and guidelines. The Thematic Reviews As part of the WCD work programme, thematic reviews will provide the baseline information, analysis and recommendations on cross-cutting issues and key controversies associated with large dams. Based on their output, the WCD will attempt to develop a consensus on a new approach that will reflect lessons learnt and the shift in priorities for decision making. The main purposes of the thematic reviews are: To achieve a common understanding on the diversity of perspectives and regional approaches related to the key issues; To synthesize state-of-the-art information on relevant emerging issues; To clarify the areas of common ground or contention around controversial issues, and ways to narrow positions; To identify good practice (including tools, methodologies and procedures) that could improve the decision making process within the broader context of sustainable management of water and energy resources. To identify criteria and guidelines for the planning and project cycles. The thematic reviews will address five major areas of concern identified in the WCD Strategy and Objectives Paper: (i) Social and Distributional issues, (ii) Environmental issues, (iii) Economic and Financial issues, (iv) Options Assessment and (v) Institutional and Governance Issues. This document refers to the last of these reviews. It is based on the documented performance of selected RBO s around the world and the experience and knowledge of a number of experts and organisations in the field of water resources, environmental and river basin management.

6 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects vi Questionnaires were sent to over 15 river basin organisations or countries that practice river basin management in one form or another, and the results incorporated in this report.

7 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects vii Executive Summary This thematic review traces the evolution of policy in major river basin organisations to assess the driving forces, how the institutions responded to change and the resultant impact on the basin s development in order to draw lessons for water institutions and river basin organisations elsewhere. The paper considers why river basins are a logical unit upon which to base integrated water resources planning and management, addresses the problems that can occur with this form of management and reviews what are the characteristics of what can be termed good integrated river basin management and how organisations are structured to achieve this. Using the experiences from basin organisations in many countries around the world, best practice is identified, this is compared with what is happening in the real world and some guidelines or lessons identified to assist in determining the most appropriate roles for RBO s in planning and managing major dams and water infrastructure. It does not review or assess the actual performance or success of specific organisations in balancing desired social and environmental outcomes with development goals but concentrates more on defining principles and approaches that can be stated to be best practice and compares actual performance with these principles. Good river basin management is analogous to good integrated water resources management (IWRM), so it is useful to explore contemporary trends in IWRM in assessing what impacts the basin manager can have on influencing the scope, nature and quality of major infrastructure projects. Stated simplistically, this is all about:! Water sharing amongst competing uses and users;! Water protection to ensure access for present and future generations to acceptable quality water;! Water supply to all citizens in a fair and equitable manner. How these three components of water management have been achieved varies greatly from country to country and must take account of all the social and cultural factors that dictate government and community values and aspirations. What can be said however, is that in both developing and developed countries where good integrated water resources management is practised, there are four common features that constitute best practice. They can be simply stated as follows. 1) An institutional framework is developed which is both robust and flexible, and includes modern legislation and an integrated policy framework. 2) Planning and management is knowledge driven. Strategic assessment of water and related resources receives high priority, and does not stop at mere data management, but actively pursues the generation of strategically focussed information and knowledge. 3) Integration is built into institutions, resource management, and policy. There is recognition of the holistic nature of ecosystems, and all policies, decisions and projects are evaluated against this background. 4) Community participation is built into all processes. It is the accepted way of doing business in the public sector, although it is in its infancy in many countries. It recognises also that the natural resources of a country belong to its people, and they have a right to participate in its management. Not only that, but community participation leads to government efficiency, ownership of policies and actions by the community, and to readily accepted principles of cost sharing. It is perhaps the integrating concept that is the most difficult to both understand and implement as it goes against the almost traditional way of singular thinking and operation stay out of my backyard

8 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects viii and let me sort out my problems. Not only do the differing views and attitudes of the key players create confusion and uncertainty as to what really constitutes an integrated approach, but integration must embrace a number of other "dimensions", for example;! Sectoral (and sub-sectoral) integration refers to the planning and management of water resources taking into account the competition and conflicts for water among irrigated agriculture, hydropower, domestic water supply and sanitation, industry, the environment itself and so on. Integrated planning in this sense leads to such things as multi-purpose storage reservoirs and other projects, water allocation and licensing systems, and river operations which provide specifically for navigation and other non-consumptive uses.! Economic, social and environmental integration means taking into account not only the financial and economic costs and benefits of water management decisions, but also the social and environmental costs and benefits. In most countries this integration is facilitated by legal requirements for environmental and social impact assessments for new projects, and often also for major changes to the prevailing water management regime.! Administrative integration refers to the coordination of the water management responsibilities and activities at all levels of government, including national, state/provincial and local/community, and between those levels. Having a well-formulated and clearly enunciated legal and organisational framework for water resource management is essential. This dimension of IWRM appears to be often overlooked, and yet lack of integration of this type can lead to serious inefficiencies and reduced effectiveness in managing water and other natural resources of any country.! Geographical integration means using the hydrologic boundaries (that is, catchments and river basins), rather than administrative boundaries, as the basic units for water resource management. It also means considering the catchments themselves and the interactions between land use and the water in rivers, streams and lakes, when making decisions about the development and management of all natural resources.! In developing countries donor integration - that is effective coordination among the many external support agencies in the development and implementation of projects and the provision of other assistance - also needs to be achieved if water resources are to be managed effectively and with the greatest efficiency in the investment of the limited available funds. All of these elements can largely be represented in good integrated water resources management if there is no overlap or confusion of roles between the components of! Regulator, standard setter, auditor;! Resource manager;! Operator and provider of technical services Whilst there is broad agreement on the merit and need for separate roles, there is some debate as to what functions comprise the regulator and the manager. For example, the issuing of water abstraction licenses and pollution permits is seen by some as a function of the regulator. Others see all aspects of water quantity and quality management as an integrated function and prefer the resource manager to be the responsible body, covering quantity and quality measuring and monitoring, allocation of water shares, managing a water licensing and pollution permitting system and generally managing to the standards set by the regulator.

9 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects ix This latter approach is adopted in this report. In broad terms, Regulator/standard setter Develops and implements a financial/economic or pricing regulatory regime. Develops water quality and other natural resource objectives, standards or guidelines. Audits the performance of the water sector as to compliance with standards. Resource manager Undertakes strategic water assessments. Develops policies and strategies to comply with national objectives and with standards set by regulator. Also develops and oversights a strategic water research program. Develops legislation to support regulatory standards and policies. Plans and allocates water. Manages quantity and quality for surface water and groundwater. Supports inter-agency and community driven basin coordination. Develops water sector capacity building programs. Promotes public participation and water awareness. Operator/service provider Builds and operates water supply, sewerage, drainage and irrigation systems. Maintains infrastructure. Provides technical advice and assistance to others. Charges others for services provided. Operates under some form of contract (s), usually to the regulator for operating rights and to the resource manager for utilisation of the water resource. In some circumstances, the policy function is separated from the resource manager so that there is clear accountability between those who develop policy and those that manage it. In other cases these functions remain in the one organisation but policy is distinctly ring-fenced to provide clarity of purpose. The key to removing any confusion between roles is really about clearly defining the boundary conditions between these levels or components. That is, where do the functions of one finish and the other start?

10 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects x To recount Integrated water resources management, if it is to be done successfully, must focus on transparent mechanisms for: * Sharing, * Protecting and, * Supplying, the scarce water resources, through: * Clear, non-overlapping institutional arrangements, * A strong knowledge of natural resources issues, * Integration across institutions, policies, strategies for all aspects of natural resources, with planning and managing occurring at the lowest integral level * Strong community participation, and with a clear separation of the roles of: * Regulator, standard setter and auditor, * Resource manager, * Operator and service provider. Having defined what constitutes good integrated water resources management and related this to the river basin, the key question is whether these characteristics must exist to ensure quality and sustainable decisions are made regarding major water projects. Can dams and other major infrastructure be successfully evaluated or regulated outside this framework? Must these attributes be portrayed through a basin agency or can more traditional line agency arrangements deliver a sustainable product? Certainly some of these elements or characteristics must exist quality data and information about a basins natural resources, a suite of natural resource policies upon which to evaluate proposals, an appropriate form of community input but it can be argued does not have to exist within a River Basin Organisation (RBO). Other institutional arrangements can succeed but they must embrace a basin-wide or integrated perspective and it is generally more efficient to do this with a clearly defined RBO. Despite the obvious benefits arising from a more coordinated, basin wide approach to integrated water resources management, it is still rare to find an effective comprehensive integrated approach in practice. This is invariably due to the many tensions between the key players and the inability or inadequacy of the available natural resource data and information in being able to generate trust and confidence between them. Simplifying all of this, the major problems affecting good integrated river basin management can be attributed to: Conflicts in the power and roles of existing administrative units and regions (or countries in the international sense), The lack of quality data, information and models upon which to develop sound knowledge and policies and thus inhibiting the development of trust and confidence amongst the players, The size of the river basin too large and it becomes unmanageable and it is better to consider sub-basin coordinating mechanisms,

11 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects xi Giving the RBO a single project-driven focus and also allowing it to move into centralised planning and social issues that rightfully belong elsewhere. Failure to firstly raise the level of awareness of the basin community and then to meaningfully involve them in water planning and management decisions. Central to avoiding or overcoming these problems is the careful selection of the functions or roles that can be considered usefully and effectively handled at the river basin level. Should the big picture issues such as centralised planning, economic and regional development or social engineering be on a river basin basis, or should matters be confined to water and natural resource issues that are obviously a river basin issue? Should river basin initiatives be project driven or be confined more closely to assessing the impacts of that project? International experience clearly answers this to the extent that basin organisations are seen to be highly effective when one or both of the following exist; Water and natural resource sharing and rules for management of shares are a dominant issue. (This includes pollution sharing ). When there is a clear need for coordination and conflict resolution in transboundary basins, or Efficiency and effectiveness of the development and operation of major projects is an issue In fact without the need for one or both of these factors it is likely that a basin organisation is unnecessary and probably would be ineffective. It can be concluded that contemporary thinking regarding integrated water resources management strongly supports the river basin as the logical unit for basin wide water planning and management issues. It provides an incentive based participatory mechanism for solving conflicts and allocating water between competing uses, as well as undertaking, or planning water and related resources assessments and management strategies. It provides a strong approach for achieving greater involvement by stakeholders and the private sector. But unless special or peculiar circumstances exist, it should not adopt a regional development role, or be solely a mechanism for building projects, or make decisions on the economic allocation of water or in social engineering aspects. A basin agency should be entrusted only with those functions that it can perform better, more effectively and efficiently and in a more sustainable way than any other institutional agency in a country or across a basin. It is also essential that it be knowledge-based,be flexible in its approach and involve the community in the most maximum, meaningful way. Many countries will not develop RBO s for a variety of sensible reasons so the issue then becomes whether the internal institutional arrangements show enough separation and clarity of roles, particularly in the area of the natural resource manager, to give clear transparency in decisionmaking for major dam and other infrastructure projects. In terms of the problems that can impact on the effectiveness of decisions to build major dams or water infrastructure the issues here for WCD are; Has the role of the resource manager been clearly identified, whether this is through an RBO or other internal institutional arrangements? Does this role ensure that a basin-wide approach is adopted, that a full suite of natural resource policies and strategies can be developed, that

12 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects xii such policies and strategies cover economic, environmental and social impacts and that nonstructural options are taken into account? Are the data and information available within the basin suitable and adequate to allow proper evaluation of major dam proposals? If not, can WCD influence or develop guidelines/standards for data coverage that must be adhered to before international support can be given to new infrastructure proposals? Lack of community awareness means lack of meaningful community input to dam proposals should WCD be recommending or developing procedures, guidelines or standards for community awareness programs? Should they be in place before donor assistance can be provided for new projects? Questionnaire on River Basin performance To better understand how experiences are occurring in practice around the world, selected RBO s and water management experts were sent a questionnaire to determine the range of functions and responsibilities attached to each organisation and just how these roles are undertaken in terms of efficiency and effectiveness. The report details the components of the responses and analyses them in terms of the attributes of good integrated river basin management. Not all responses covered all the issues raised and therefore any conclusions drawn are somewhat general. Nevertheless they do show trends and are valuable in determining where present day practice lies in relation to what is seen as best practice. Some points do clearly emerge, Project design or evaluation, construction and operation is still a very strong role of RBO s, although the efficiency of delivery is questionable. A majority of responses see developing natural resource guidelines and policies as only a partial role. More than half of the responses see only a partial role in water quality monitoring, water minimisation and reuse, demand management and public awareness and consultation. Groundwater monitoring and policy making is not done by many. Catchment protection and land use planning (or at least inputing to it) rates lowly in importance Conversely, hydrologic modelling is given much attention, as good practice demands. The concern from all of this is that the majority of current RBO s focus on project implementation and operation and most of the components of the natural resource manager role are not given high focus. This is not necessarily by desire but as defined in enabling legisation and agreements. In terms of good practice in evaluating new major dam proposals, the following is of concern, Groundwater investigation appears not to be well covered so how can conjunctive use or groundwater utilisation be evaluated and compared with new surface water augmentation proposals?

13 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects xiii Similar implications exist for not having a strong role in demand management, water minimisation and reuse how can all options be properly canvassed? Although good hydrologic modelling is quite a dominant attribute, developing natural resource policies upon which to use the model to test the impact of proposals in not a big issue. How can there be any confidence that proposals will not exceed the capability of the natural resource base to withstand stress if limiting policies are not developed? Catchment protection is only a partial role in more than half of the responses, yet this is a vital issue in evaluating dam proposals and the long term impact on the environment. This is part of the role of being able to develop a full suite of natural resource policies to control or oversight basin development. The report analysed the responses of the various basin organisations to assess the degree of separation of roles in each entity. The data is not expansive and the nature of each response can produce a different strength of involvement in each category when in fact the variation may not be that great. Consequently, specific conclusions should not be drawn from the standings or ratings. However it does show that there is a lack of clear separation of roles and functions occurring in many RBO s, particularly between the resource manager and the operator roles. The more mature organisations such as the Rhine Commission and MDBC have a strong role in resource management and any operational function is relatively minor and is ring-fenced within the organisation to ensure no confusion in accountabilities. The emerging Mekong is much the same. However, the TVA has a strong role in both. It very much reflects the situation when it was established in the 1930 s but this dual role is now being questioned. Even its Chairman recently suggested that its resource management role be given to other more appropriate bodies thus allowing TVA to concentrate solely on its power generation/sales function i.e., the role of an operator. Lessons for the Future Using Best Practice. To be successful at the basin-wide level level, cooperation must be underpinned by a strong and fair legal agreement that clearly defines how shares of the natural resource base are utilised and managed and how basin wide planning is to occur. It must be capable of generating trust and confidence amongst the members and stakeholders. If implementation and operation of major infrastructure is a role, the accountability links to the resource manager must be clearly identified. There should desirably be a clear separation of roles of regulator/standard setter, natural resource manager and operator. If this can not be achieved by mandating separate organisations for each function, then there must be clear separate lines of accountability for each function within an organisation. RBO s must remain dynamic and responsive and be able to evolve to meet changing societal needs and the emerging natural resource problems. It is unrealistic to expect a new RBO to be capable of playing a key or dominant technical and political role from inception. They need to build gradually, evolving and growing stronger and more integrated in approach, as links with other national and international administrations develop. An underpinning strength of good basin management, whether it be through a well functioning RBO or some form of centralised agency, is access to quality data across all aspects of the natural resource base, covering economic, social and environmental attributes. It does not have to be the

14 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects xiv collector of data but must be able to ensure standards are adhered to, and have access to it. Yet, a basic problem with data collection undertaken individually by all riparian countries is that a countries strategic behaviour leads it to not reveal the true data. Cooperation in data sharing is the first step in achieving sustainable decisions in major water infrastructure proposals. Good technical data, systems and models covering all aspects of the natural resource base across a whole basin are essential for achieving sound water management. Such technical information is needed even if the politics don t allow an integrating institutional framework to be developed. It can create the necessary pre-conditions for better coordination to emerge. Hence, it is vital that the technical experts across all countries/states in a river basin continue to work to create an accepted technical framework to basin management and allow the politics to follow. Successful RBO s have a role and capability to develop and test policies and strategies on both the supply and demand sides and must be able to use this role to assess all aspects of new development proposals and their alternatives for basin sustainability. Water trading/economic instruments should be part of the water managers tool box and are particularly important for an RBO in terms of evaluating all options in the demand supply cycle. It is a basic role of water and natural resource institutions to promote public awareness of natural resource issues in a river basin and to develop and openly implement appropriate community participation processes. Only when the community can participate through a defined process suitable for the social and cultural values of a country can truly sustainable decisions in major water matters be achieved. A sound funding base and charging policy to support efficient operation and maintenance, good basin management and sustainable development (both major infrastructure and non-structural options) must start with proper strategic planning that defines objectives, goals, priorities etc. and an investment program and a basin natural resource business plan that gives governments and donors a clear indication of what can be achieved and at what cost. Clear guidelines need to be developed that will allow all these elements of best practice to be followed in investigating, assessing, constructing, operating and evaluating the performance of dams, including an approach to modify those found to be deficient in terms of long term sustainability. Irrespective of whether this is focused on a basin agency or on national water institutions, it desirably should start with a separation of roles of standard setter/regulator, resource manager and developer/operator/service provider and with an expansive set of functions and responsibilities for the resource manager that ensures that a basin-wide approach is adopted, that a full suite of natural resource policies and strategies can be developed, that such policies and strategies cover economic, environmental and social impacts and that non-structural options are taken into account. On this basis, specific functions of a basin agency should include: Data monitoring, information creation, systems modelling and health of the basin reporting. Policy and strategy development across all aspects of natural resources and across economic environment and social disciplines. Natural resources sharing and rules for managing these shares. Long term basin wide water and natural resource planning and investment or funding strategies. A requirement to consider non-structural issues such as demands management, water re-use, water trading and economic instruments and catchment protection etc.

15 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects xv A referral role that ensures that all the members of the RBO have to submit proposals that could significantly effect the water related resources. Reporting roles to ensure operators comply with license agreements. Community awareness and participation responsibilities. Any RBO that has these functions and has the capability to evolve over time to respond to changing circumstances will be capable of quality IWRM and of making a full assessment of non-dam options and alternatives. However, as relatively few basin organisations have as yet achieved best practice and are mostly operating within the initial roles that led to creation, there are only a few examples where this is presently happening and no-one suggests that these have totally achieved best practice or are achieving optimum results. Detailed case studies of these should occur to accompany guidelines or best practice manuals that WCD may choose to develop. It is suggested that the French basin agencies, the TVA, the MDBC and the Rhine Commission should be covered in detailed studies.

16 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects 1 1. Introduction This thematic review will retrace the evolution of policy in major river basin organisations to assess the driving forces, how the institutions responded to change and the resultant impact on the basin s development in order to draw lessons for river basin authorities elsewhere. The paper considers why river basins are a logical unit upon which to base integrated water resources planning and management, or at least the overall assessment and endorsement of plans developed by others, addresses the problems that can occur with this form of management and reviews what are the characteristics of what can be termed good integrated river basin management and how organisations are structured to achieve this. Using the experiences from basin organisations in many countries around the world, best practice is identified, this is compared with what is happening in the real world and some guidelines or lessons identified to assist in determining the most appropriate roles for River Basin Organisations (RBO s) in planning and managing major dams and water infrastructure. The paper is not a critique of all aspects of river basin management or of the quality of performance of specific basin organisations in achieving balanced economic, environmental and social outcomes but attempts to focus the discussion on the question What role can or should RBO s play in planning and managing dams and their alternatives as opposed to the more general issue of what are the desirable roles of an RBO in managing a river basin for the sustainability of its resources. By necessity, the discussion in each Chapter covers generic issues relating to river basin management but in all Chapters seeks to focus the debate on to the central theme by continually posing questions as to the role relating to dams and their alternatives. A central issue emerging all around the world is the increasing need to manage better what water we have already captured. Often the best and most productive and economic dam sites have already been developed so developing new water conservation projects are expensive for the water they deliver. As well the environmental requirements are rightfully more stringent now than in the past and social considerations such as resettlement are much more sensitive. All of this says that non-structural alternatives are now much more important and the role of RBO s in seeking to ensure this broader perspective of options and alternatives is followed, is canvassed in the paper. Ultimately all of this discussion must be seen within the remit of the WCD and lessons, questions, guidelines or recommendations are framed to fall within these responsibilities. To recall from the Preface above, WCD output falls in three components; Output 1: A global review of the development effectiveness of large dams; Output 2: A framework for options-assessments and decision-making processes; Output 3: A set of internationally acceptable criteria and guidelines. This paper concentrates on contributing to the latter two of these.

17 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects 2 2. Elements of Good Integrated Water Resources Management Good river basin management is analogous to good integrated water resources management (IWRM), so it is useful to explore contemporary trends in IWRM in assessing what impacts the basin manager can have on influencing the scope, nature and quality of major infrastructure projects. In recent years the key principles of good integrated water resource management have become a matter of international consensus. These principles are based on the often poorly appreciated fact that water is a finite resource, vulnerable to degradation, and essential for life. From the 1992 Rio Summit on Sustainable Development one of the clearest sets of management principles was developed and agreed. Agenda 21 describes them as follows. Integrated water resources management is based on the perception of water as an integral part of the ecosystem, a natural resource and a social and economic good, whose quantity and quality determine the nature of its utilisation. To this end, water resources have to be protected, taking into account the functioning of aquatic ecosystems and the perennial nature of the resource, in order to satisfy and reconcile needs for water in human activities. In developing and using water resources, priority has to be given to the satisfaction of basic needs and the safeguarding of ecosystems. Beyond these requirements, however, water users should be charged appropriately. Integrated water resources management, including the integration of land- and waterrelated aspects, should be carried out at the level of the catchment basin or sub-basin. Four principal objectives should be pursued, as follows: (a) (b) (c) (d) To promote a dynamic, interactive, iterative and multi-sectoral approach to water resources management, including the identification and protection of potential sources of freshwater supply, that integrates technological, socioeconomic, environmental and human health considerations; To plan for the sustainable and rational utilisation, protection, conservation and management of water resources based on community needs and priorities within the framework of national economic development policy; To design, implement and evaluate projects and programs that are both economically efficient and socially appropriate within clearly defined strategies, based on an approach of full public participation, including that of women, youth, indigenous people and local communities in water management policy-making and decision-making; To identify and strengthen or develop, as required, in particular in developing countries, the appropriate institutional, legal and financial mechanisms to ensure that water policy and its implementation are a catalyst for sustainable social progress and economic growth. Stated simplistically, this is all about:! Water sharing amongst competing uses and users;! Water protection to ensure access for present and future generations to acceptable quality water;! Water supply to all citizens in a fair and equitable manner.

18 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects 3 How these three components of water management have been achieved varies greatly from country to country and must take account of all the social and cultural factors that dictate government and community values and aspirations. What can be said however, is that in both developing and developed countries where good integrated water resources management is practised, there are four common features which can be considered to represent best practice. They can be simply stated as follows. 1) An institutional framework is developed which is both robust and flexible, and includes modern legislation and an integrated policy framework. 2) Planning and management is knowledge driven. Strategic assessment of water and related resources receives high priority, and does not stop at mere data management, but actively pursues the generation of strategically focussed information and knowledge. 3) Integration is built into institutions, resource management, and policy. There is recognition of the holistic nature of ecosystems, and all policies, decisions and projects are evaluated against this background. 4) Community participation is built into all processes. It is now the accepted way of doing business in the public sector, although understandably it is in its infancy in many developing countries. It recognises also that the natural resources of a country belong to its people, and they have a right to participate in its management. Not only that, but community participation leads to government efficiency, ownership of policies and actions by the community, and to readily accepted principles of cost sharing. There is much variation amongst experts as to how these attributes are actually implemented and there will certainly be different emphases in different countries to reflect the stage of development, social and cultural values, the degree of community awareness on natural resource issues and so on. As well, there will be differences between approaches in international and national river basins. However the principles for good IWRM remain clear and are the ideal starting or reference point upon which to develop appropriate policy and institutional frameworks for managing water resources in an integrated way. The particular institutional model chosen and developed is a good example of this variation. It can vary from the all-powerful Basin Authority, such as the TVA, where most water-related development and management functions are undertaken, to a Basin Commission, which concentrates more on basin-wide planning, policy and strategy setting, data and information generation, and perhaps with only a little development and operation role, to a Coordinating Committee/Council that concentrates more on policy setting and overall resource management oversight. No one model is right the particular circumstances should be analysed and an approach chosen that best meets the local political and social conditions. Perhaps it is the integration aspect of water-related policies and strategies that is the most difficult to achieve. It goes against the almost traditional way of thinking which seeks to solve a particular problem from within ones own resources and not involving others until the problem is solved. Yet this is the very approach that can cause major dam proposals to be viewed in a narrow or single issue perspective.

19 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects 4 So what really constitutes integration in water resources planning and management issues and why is it difficult to achieve? How important is it to the deliberations of the WCD? Part of the problem in achieving integration is that people from different professional backgrounds tend to view water resources management differently. And this differing view can be a very significant factor in whether major infrastructure proposals are viewed holistically or sustainably or within a much narrower framework. To the ecologist, water resources management is often connected with reversing the effects of the deterioration of ecosystems, land degradation and geomorphology, pollution, destruction of wetlands or habitat protection. To the water engineer, water resources management is about dams, reservoirs, flood protection, diversions, river training, water treatment and reclamation. To the lawyer, the main issues in water resources management are the ownership of water, systems of water rights, the priority of use, water markets, water legislation, and international water law. To the economist, water resources management is connected with economic efficiency, cost recovery and the attainment of national objectives. Not only do the views and attitudes of the key players create some confusion and uncertainty as to what really constitutes an integrated approach, but it must embrace a number of other "dimensions", for example; Sectoral (and sub-sectoral) integration refers to the planning and management of water resources taking into account the competition and conflicts for water among irrigated agriculture, hydropower, domestic water supply and sanitation, industry, the environment itself and so on. Economic, social and environmental integration means taking into account not only the financial and economic costs and benefits of water management decisions, but also the social and environmental costs and benefits. Administrative integration refers to the coordination of the water management responsibilities and activities at all levels of government, including national, state/provincial and local/community, and between those levels. and reduced effectiveness in managing water and other natural resources of any country. Geographical integration means using the hydrologic boundaries (that is, catchments and river basins), rather than administrative boundaries, as the basic units for water resource management. It also means considering the catchments themselves and the interactions between land use and the water in rivers, streams and lakes, when making decisions about the development and management of all natural resources. Donor integration - that is effective coordination among the many external support agencies in the development and implementation of projects and the provision of other assistance. All of these elements can largely be represented in good integrated water resources management if there is no overlap or confusion of roles between the components of! Regulator, standard setter, auditor;! Resource manager;

20 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects 5! Operator and provider of technical services Whilst there is broad agreement on the merit and need for separate roles, there is some debate as to what functions comprise the regulator and the manager. For example, the issuing of water abstraction licenses and pollution permits is seen by some as a function of the regulator. Others see all aspects of water quantity and quality management as an integrated function and prefer the resource manager to be the responsible body, covering quantity and quality measuring and monitoring, allocation of water shares, managing a water licensing and pollution permitting system and generally managing to the standards set by the regulator. This latter approach is adopted in this report. In broad terms, Regulator/standard setter Develops and implements a financial/economic or pricing regulatory regime. Develops water quality and other natural resource objectives, standards or guidelines. Audits the performance of the water sector as to compliance with standards. Resource manager Undertakes strategic water assessments. Develops policies and strategies to comply with national objectives and with standards set by regulator. Also develops and oversights a strategic water research program. Develops legislation to support regulatory standards and policies. Plans and allocates water; develops investment and funding strategies. Manages quantity and quality for surface water and groundwater. Supports inter-agency and community driven basin coordination. Develops water sector capacity building programs. Promotes public participation and water awareness. Operator/service provider Builds and operates water supply, sewerage, drainage and irrigation systems. Maintains infrastructure. Provides technical advice and assistance to others. Charges others for services provided. Operates under some form of contract (s), usually to the regulator for operating rights and to the resource manager for utilisation of the water resource. In some circumstances, the policy function is separated from the resource manager so that there is clear accountability between those who develop policy and those that manage it. In other cases these functions remain in the one organisation but policy is distinctly ringfenced to provide clarity of purpose.

21 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects 6 The key to removing any confusion between roles is really about clearly defining the boundary conditions between these levels or components. That is, where do the functions of one finish and the other start? To recount Integrated water resources management, if it is to be done successfully, must focus on transparent mechanisms for: * Sharing, * Protecting and, * Supplying, the scarce water resources, through: * Clear, non-overlapping institutional arrangements, * A strong knowledge of natural resources issues, * Integration across institutions, policies, strategies for all aspects of natural resources, with planning and managing occurring at the lowest integral level * Strong community participation, appropriate to the circumstances and with a clear separation of the roles of: * Regulator, standard setter and auditor, * Resource manager, * Operator and service provider. Desirably, a modern, successful RBO will reflect these concepts of good IWRM and it will be increasingly difficult for the one organisation to be all things rolled into one. The roles of regulator/standard setter, resource manager and operator should preferably be separated for national water sector institutions and this applies equally so for RBO s. Successful RBO s are now more likely to be quality resource managers perhaps with a small operating/development role, but certainly with clearly defined regulatory or policy roles, and agreed links to the operator that ensure accountability and performance in accordance with an agreed operating agreement. For those that exist more for efficiency reasons in regard to the development and operation of major projects then desirably, they should divest themselves of any significant resource management functions. In fact more than not, they should be regulated by the resource manager. Whilst this approach constitutes what is accepted by most as best practice principles, it does not mean that it drives institutional structure in all cases. Many developing countries will not have political systems, philosophical views or organisational capacity to embrace these separation of roles at this stage The point here is that these approaches seek to more clearly define specific accountabilities and avoid as much as possible an overlap or confusion of roles

22 River Basins its Role in Major Water Infrastructure Projects 7 which inevitably lead to inefficiencies and, in a resource management sense, often the acceptance of less than optimum and sustainable solutions. Each country will develop its own approach but if it seeks to follow best management principles in whatever form is appropriate for its particular conditions then a more sustainable result will occur. This will be shown in the grouping of functions within the three areas of regulator/ resource manager/operator that each country adopts some will decide to incorporate the building and operation of supply systems within the resource manager role for efficiency of supply reasons, even though this can lead to confused or biased responses to the resource management role. Having defined here what constitutes good integrated water resources management and related this to the river basin, the question for WCD is whether these characteristics must exist to ensure quality and sustainable decisions are made regarding major water projects. Can dams and other major infrastructure be successfully evaluated or regulated outside this framework? Must these attributes be portrayed through a basin agency or can more traditional line agency arrangements deliver a sustainable product? Certainly some of these elements or characteristics must exist quality data and information about a basins natural resources, a suite of natural resource policies upon which to evaluate proposals, an appropriate form of community input but it can be argued does not have to exist within an RBO. Other institutional arrangements can and do succeed but they must embrace a basin-wide perspective and it is more efficient to do this with a clearly defined RBO if one is able to be created displaying the four attributes of best practice mentioned earlier. WCD should seek to have guidelines developed that will encourage the adoption of the processes of good IWRM - adequate data networks, policy and strategy development and community processes - before major dam proposals are contemplated.