Water governance challenges in Colombia

Transcription

1 Water governance challenges in Colombia Daphne Willems Water Governance Centre, the Netherlands Discussion Paper 1321 May 2013 This paper looks at the water governance challenges facing Colombia. The author discusses the work of the Water Governance Centre in assessing the challenges faced and developing recommendations for resolving them in order to ensure that water resources are managed sustainably. The Global Water Forum publishes discussion papers to share the insights and knowledge contained within our online articles. The articles are contributed by experts in the field and provide: original academic research; unique, informed insights and arguments; evaluations of water policies and projects; as well as concise overviews and explanations of complex topics. We encourage our readers to engage in discussion with our contributing authors through the GWF website. Keywords: water governance, Colombia, reforms, challenges Colombia faces severe water problems. In the winter of , heavy flooding and accompanying landslides affected 93 percent of the country s municipalities; 3.5 million people were forced to leave their homes and 464 people lost their lives. 1 In response, the Colombian government started several actions. In addition to direct disaster management, President Santos asked for the support of the Netherlands in order to improve the national water governance situation. As a result, the Dutch Water Governance Centre (WGC) supported the first analysis, which was started by the Colombian partners MADS (the ministry of environment and sustainable development) and DNP (the national planning department). A national dialogue (MIGA; Misión Gobernanza del Agua) was undertaken during 18 months ( ), with hundreds of actors participating. Policy makers and executers, sector partners, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other stakeholders revealed the most important Colombian water governance problems. The results of this broad discussion formed the diverse input for the analysis of WGC, executed in the first quarter of Suggested Citation: Willems, D. (2013), Water governance challenges in Colombia, GWF Discussion Paper 1321, Global Water Forum, Canberra, Australia. Available online at: governance- challenges- in- colombia/

2 Method The three-month study by WGC was closely followed and supported by the Colombian partners MADS and DNP, to ensure that the results would meet the needs of the unique Colombian situation. To analyze and prioritize the multitude of problems addressed by MIGA, a tailor-made method was used, based on a combination of the OECD multi-level approach (gap analysis) 2 and WGC s three-layer model (see Figure 1). 3 Post-analysis, the WGC formulated recommendations to tackle the identified problems. aspects are executed by the CAR, 33 autonomic regional authorities responsible for water quality and quantity regulation through permits, taxes and rates. The departments (provinces) have a minor role in water issues, municipalities are responsible for water purification, and drinking water is organized by semi-private companies (see Figure 2). Figure 2. Governmental organization in Colombia simplified version focused on water related issues. Results of the analysis Figure 1. Water Governance three-layer model. Background Colombia is a federal state in the northwest of South-America which covers an area greater than the size of Spain and France together. National laws, including national water laws, originate from the ministries in Bogotá. Environmental issues and their water related As early as the first weeks, the analysis showed that the main problems were not found in the content layer: the Colombian partners have sufficient knowledge and information for effective water governance, although it is not always available at all governmental levels. Although the three layers are strongly interrelated, the most important challenges appeared in the institutional layer and in the relational layer. The main problem turned out to be the translation of (national) policies into concrete (regional and local) action, namely the execution of prevailing laws. This conclusion

3 is supported by a study on the functioning of the Colombian discharge fee system. While this is often held up as a model of a wellfunctioning, economic incentive pollution control program in a developing country, the program was beset by a number of problems including limited implementation in many regions, widespread noncompliance by municipal sewerage authorities, and a confused relationship between discharge fees and emissions standards. While proponents claim the incentives that discharge fees created for polluters to cut emissions in a costeffective manner were responsible, a recent study found that the incentives they created for regulatory authorities to improve permitting, monitoring, and enforcement were at least as important. 4 This lack of implementation at a local and regional level is caused by a number of factors, including an absence of: Clear politics, with a long term view and realistic goals Good organization (with clear roles and responsibilities) and coordination Sufficient capacity at the regional and local level Sustainable financing Cooperation, participation and information sharing The performance differences between the CAR and the municipalities are enormous: while some municipalities function sufficiently well, some simply do not. At the present moment, water budgets have to be negotiated each year, thereby undermining long term investments, and coordination lacks both horizontal (e.g. between ministries) and vertical (between different governmental layers) integration. During the last few years, efforts have been made to tackle some of these issues, for example through the construction of Consejos to align coordination and cooperation. An integral water law was also written in 2010 which covered many relevant elements, although the WCG analysis concluded that it still lacks a long term vision and concrete, measurable goals. 5 Moreover, at a local level, several good practices have been executed ad hoc in programs such as the MIGA. While such measures are useful, Colombia needs a national, thorough, and long-lasting approach to solve its water governance problems. Recommendations The study produced 95 recommendations to improve the water governance situation in Colombia. They are presented as solution directions, based on experiences in Europe (e.g. the International Rhine Commission, the Water Framework Directive, specific Dutch experiences) as well as in Latin America and the Caribbean (e.g. the construction of National Water Agencies in 8 countries).

4 The recommendations vary from straightforward concrete actions to discussions of more complex issues. Examples of concrete actions include to accompany plans with a monitoring program, create public access to relevant information and strengthen the consejos with a permanent secretary and recourses. Examples of the more complex recommendations include reforming the organization of the water sector based on river basin areas and the subsidiarity principle (i.e. assigning tasks to the least centralized authority capable of addressing the task effectively), and reforming the financial structure based on long term planning and the polluter/user pays-principle (recuperation of costs). Follow-up Two years after the severe flooding accident, the momentum to solve Colombia s water problems has diminished. The peace process with the FARC dominates the political discussions at the expense of water safety issues. In order to tackle the water governance problems analyzed in this study, a new sense of urgency has to be created by the Colombian partners. Only then, can the recommendations of the WGC be initiated. The 95 recommendations referred to in this article will form the starting point for a series of workshops later this year. Together, policy makers, sector partners (e.g. mining, agriculture, drinking water plants) and other stakeholders (such as NGOs) will improve and concretize the proposed recommendations, taking the unique Colombian situation explicitly into account. This will result in a prioritized action plan with concrete short term and long term actions. In 2014, a number of pilot areas will be subject to the application of the prioritized actions as a precursor to the execution in the near future of an improved action plan for the entire country. Colombia is a large and rich country, diverse in cultures, landscapes, qualities and challenges. The researchers from the Dutch Water Governance Centre hope to have contributed towards improved water governance in order to maintain this richness for current and future generations to enjoy. References 1. Dirección de Gestión del Riesgo (DGR), Instituto de Hidrología, Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales (IDEAM) and Policía de Carreteras; results presented in Vanguardia, 23 May OECD (2011), Water Governance in OECD countries: a multi-level approach. OECD studies on water, OECD Publishing; 3. Maarten Hofstra, Water Governance, a framework for better communication UNESCO-IHE/ Water Governance Centre in WATER GOVERNANCE, year 3, No. 1, April Blackman, A., Colombia s discharge fee program: incentives for polluters or regulators? Journal of environmental management, 90 page (Resources for the future)

5 5. Ministerio de Ambiente, Vivienda y Desarrollo Territorial. Política Nacional para la Gestión Integral del Recurso Hídrico. Bogotá D.C., Colombia, Viceministro de Ambiente 2010, 124 p. About the author(s) Daphne Willems is an Ecological Consultant for Daphnia Ecological Consultancy in Stroming as well as working with the Water Governance Centre in the Netherlands. The studies referenced in this article were carried out by several researchers at the Water Governance Centre, including: Maarten Hofstra (Senior Advisor in Policy Analysis and Water Governance in the Environmental Resources Department, UNESO-IHE), Andrea van der Kerk (Consultant for Andrea van der Kerk consultancy, Amsterdam) and Ina Krüger (Researcher in the field of IWRM, Water Quality Management, Nature Protection). There are three related articles (in Spanish) that can be requested from info@watergovernancecentre.nl, including: Informe I: Diagnóstico y análisis; Informe II: Elementos para la formulación de una estrategia nacional para la gobernanza del agua en Colombia; and III Presentación: Resumen y informe final. About the Global Water Forum The Global Water Forum (GWF) is an initiative of the UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Governance at the Australian National University. The GWF presents knowledge and insights from leading water researchers and practitioners. The contributions generate accessible and evidence-based insights towards understanding and addressing local, regional, and global water challenges. The principal objectives of the site are to: support capacity building through knowledge sharing; provide a means for informed, unbiased discussion of potentially contentious issues; and, provide a means for discussion of important issues that receive less attention than they deserve. To reach these goals, the GWF seeks to: present fact and evidence-based insights; make the results of academic research freely available to those outside of academia; investigate a broad range of issues within water management; and, provide a more in-depth analysis than is commonly found in public media. If you are interested in learning more about the GWF or wish to make a contribution, please visit the site at or contact the editors at editor@globalwaterforum.org. The views expressed in this article belong to the individual authors and do not represent the views of the Global Water Forum, the UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Water Governance, UNESCO, the Australian National University, or any of the institutions to which the authors are associated. Please see the Global Water Forum terms and conditions here. Copyright 2013 Global Water Forum. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative Works 3.0 License. See to view a copy of the license.