evolving iwrm mukhtar hashemi
TRANSCRIPT
Evolving the Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) Paradigm:To reassess the underline policy assumptionsMukhtar Hashemi ❶ Associate Researcher, The Centre for Land Use and Water Resources Research (CLUWRR), Newcastle University, UK; ❷ Scientific Advisor, The Office of Applied Researches, IWRMC, Ministry of Energy, Iran ❸ National IWRM Consultant, UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project, Department of Environment, Iran22-24 Feb 2011Amman- JordanKempinski Hotel
Part A
A. A regional outlook
WANA Geopolitical conditions:Semi arid and Arid
Driving Forces :
Population Growth
Urbanization -Mega Cities
Mecca
Amman
Cairo
Damascus
Riyadh Madina
Tehran
Regional disparity
The degree of the ability of WANA Countries to meet the 2025 urban water demand?
Results
7 countries with no difficulty to achieve the demand include: Iran, Turkey, Lebanon, UAE, Qatar,,
Kuwait and Bahrain
Persian Gulf states depend on desalination
9 countries with no difficulty but they conditionally can meet the demand
Yemen- no urban population driver due to poverty
Syria- depends on water from Turkey
Sudan- friction with Egypt? poverty, less demand
Morocco: short term problem with re allocation of water resources
Libya- Oil to water- desalination??
Iraq- water from Turkey
Eritrea/Ethiopia - Poverty- no demand increase
Egypt- if 60% share of the Nile UnchangedAlgeria- underdevelopedAfghanistan- Poverty and under-development
1 country with geopolitical problems rather than resource problems
Palestinian – a question of EquityIsrael takes a lion Shareno urban supply infrastructure
4 countries with sever problems in meeting the demand
Tunisia- rundown of its irrigated agriculture by 50% or desalination
KSA-Small renewable resources and huge urban populations and there might be a need for more desalination plants and use of groundwater
Oman-Extensive groundwater mining not viable long term option and require desalination in the future
Jordan- Small renewable resource; import of water from Lebanon via Israel is a non-starter; desalination from Aquaba port is a difficult task with over 1000 m pumping requirements and 250 km of water transport; reallocation from irrigation only buys time;
Overexploitation Zayandarud River Esfahan:
Sheep or fish?
Can you allocate any water
Where is Water?
Climate Change???? Droughts??
What happened to the rain? (Penman, 1961)
Basic definition: systems approach
Box1: basic definitions (Source: Hashemi and O'Connell, 2011)
Policy: a political (governmental) statement outlining the
vision. Goals and objectives of IWRM plans
Scenario: a futuristic outlook of development such as
assumptions under which development occurs; these are
exogenous to the water system such as population growth
or climate change that cannot be controlled or
determined by the water system
Management option: a measure or an action taken to
improve the performance of the water system, these
measures can be legal, institutional, technical, social,
economics, ecological.
Strategy: a collection of management options to be
considered under different anthropogenic and natural
climatic scenarios.
B. Moves towards implementing IWRM
Dominant paradigm- 40 years of historyThere has been a lack in implementing IWRM worldwide despite its adoption by national governments around the globe
Characterisation of efforts
Numerous researchers- variety of IWRM themesScattered and dispersed efforts Lack of communicationWorld Bank (2007):water scarcity in MENA (=WANA)Impact of non water policies are greater
INTEGRATION; IWRM AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Meeting the criteria for sustainability
UNDERLYING THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
(Source: Morrison et al 2004)
Strategic support
Structural
Procedural
Facilitative resources Functional
Methodological exchange
Participatory decision-making
How integration?
How to achieve holism?: sustainability criteria
1. integration, 2. spatial adequacy (basin level), 3. manageability, 4. systematic, 5. representation (participation), 6. comparability, 7. communication (precautionary), and8. forward looking (prediction).
Four Dimensions of integration
(Morrison et al, 2004))
Five Criteria for sustainability (sustainable development (Gasparatos et al, 2008)
Principles of IWRM
In terms of policymaking
1- a multi-jurisdictional spatial organization
1- integration of social, economic, environmental and institutional issues and their interactions and interdependencies;
Holistic approach An integrated and inter-sectoral policy-making Framework that can assess the impact of non-water policies on water policy and display their inter-linkage
2-participatory coordination of different stakeholders, civil societies and actors
2- creating a participatory environment; empowerment policies;
a participatory approach
Creating enabling environments for participatory decision-making
3- collaborative decision- making from the participatory approach
3- predictions of future trends and the impact of policies and development plans on sustainability; 4- dealing with uncertainties by taking conservative and precautionary measures
Using a systems analysis approach (policies, scenarios, management options (measures) and strategies). See Box 1.
Institutional design criteria to evaluate and monitor planning and implementation of the strategies adopted through the policy-making process
4- agreement based on rationality
5- to foster ecocentric ethics and equity (intergenerational and intergenerational);
supporting the socio-economic welfare of people i.e. eradicating poverty; empowering women; sustaining the environment
Policy appraisal mechanisms to indicate the performance and the impact of water policy
Table 1. Governing principles in water resources management and their policy implications (adopted form Hashemi and O'Connell (2011)
Policy integration useful
Recommendation 1: • There is a need for an integrated research policy• Sustainable research portfolio- appropriate funding
mechanism
The missing policy links
7 missing policy links which are neglected in IWRM plans
The omissions
1- Green water- soil moisture and water stored in plants2- Gray water and return water 3- Environmental services (functions) of water
3. Impact of land use change on blue water
Forest Policy based on Land and water myths (e.g. Calder 2005)
1 Forests increase rainfall.2 Forests increase runoff.3 Forests regulate flows.4 Forests reduce erosion.5 Forests reduce floods.6 Forests ‘sterilize’ water supplies – improve water quality.7 Agro forestry systems increase productivity.
More research needed…..
The negative/ positive impact due biophysical interactionsSite specificType of plants and canopies
How impact? Geological factors such as landslide and jungle management activities, roads etc liter cover
5- Virtual water in water balance Wheat imports in 2008 (6 million tons)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Swizerland
Canada
USA
Germany
Russia
France
others
co
ntr
ies
of
imp
ort
% of total import
(Iran)
Water Dependency vs. Water self sufficiency
More research: scarcity vs. Dependency
water scarcity water dependency Iran and Pakistan water scarcity but low dependency Iran 93 water self sufficiencyPakistan 100 water self sufficiency
Scarcity- dependency [source Delft, 2003)
water footprint ا
The total water footprint of 0.5 litre PET-bottle sugar-containing carbonated beverage according to thetype and origin of the sugar )SB=Sugar Beet, SC=Sugar Cane, HFMS= High Fructose Maize Syrup)
UNESCO-IHP )Ercin et al, 2009)
Iran Half liter of drink beverage from sugar beet-
UNESCO-IHP (Ercin et al, 2009)
More omissions …
6- fisheries sector in river basin management -neglected 7- role of belief systems - direct bearing on policy making decision
Recommendation 2
Redefinition of the scope or focus of IWRMequitable allocation strategy include whole water balance (Blue and Green Water or so called the ‘ever-green’ revolution: Falkenmark and Rockstörm, 2006).
Policy to acknowledge technical challenges – technology driven
to understand the physical processes affecting green water (e.g. vapour flow and green soil flow) and be able to include these concepts in the water balance components of the water resources models. Hence, there are many technical challenges to initiate the new green revolution. Technology will have an important role to play. It has to adjust to new paradigms and take an adaptive and innovative technical strategy.
Recommendation 3: Redefinition of the scale of IWRM
A depoliticized river basin concept approach- but most decisions are political Most use- Agricultural water use- smaller unit - smaller physical unit (at catchment or watershed level) can be used to reflect what happens at the farming level.
Management at farm level
Recommendation 4: ecohydological concept- interface among ecology,
land and water Redefining water science intersecting applied and socio-economic disciplines Restoration/ adaptive management as part of the policy
Recommendation 5: virtual water policy as a regional policy for
cooperation
Recommendation 6: Enhancement of the Role of belief systems and
culture in policymaking
Policy making- straggle over idea and [values] Interplay between policy and Legitimacy
Coastal ecosystems are vital60% of population90% of global fisheries25% global biological productivities Integrated Coastal Area and river basin management- ICARM – not new but focus on new gaps….
Recommendation 7: linking IWRM and ICZM- water –land-sea-interface
Science and Policy Interface:An integrated socio-technical and
Institutional Framework to deal with water scarcity in WANA regionMukhtar Hashemi ❶ Associate Researcher, The Centre for Land Use and Water Resources Research (CLUWRR), Newcastle University, UK; ❷ Scientific Advisor, The Office of Applied Researches, IWRMC, Ministry of Energy, Iran ❸ National IWRM Consultant, UNDP/GEF Conservation of Iranian Wetlands Project, Department of Environment, Iran22-24 Feb 2011Amman- JordanKempinski Hotel
Part B
Framework: Science and Water policy interface
Transforming Scientific evidence into policymaking
Half full or half empty?
Definitions
A Framework is a non-predictive representation of structures and provides interlinkges for the relevant components of a system that influence the policy in question.theory “makes specific assumptions on the linkages between variables and outcomes” (quoting Clement 2008)
Definitions cont.
a model “makes more precise predictions than a theory and often relies on mathematical tools" Interface: a mechanism or framework to link two systems; be able to exchange, use or process the informationPerspectives are mental models of actors involved in designing , implementing and affected by policy in question
A Science- water policy interface defines the points of interaction,
interplay and linkage between technical and social or non-technical
frameworks.
Multidimensional Water scarcity3 levels (World Bank, 2007)Governance level: lack of transparency in decision makingOrganisational capacity level: inability of organisations to effectively manage water resourcesPhysical resource level (water shortage, water stress conditions, temporal and seasonal variations
Avoiding pitfalls Poor definition of policy objectivesLack of Local knowledgeInadequate consideration of Ethics Lack of clear participation mechanismsUndermining learning during the processLack of economic assessment of policy
Science and water policy interface
Linking sociopolitical and technical assessment frameworksuse of different theories and frameworks to form the a single conceptual framework
Components
Conceptual frameworks: underlining policy assumption (IWRM) and dealing with cultural and ethical issues (perspectives) Analytical frameworks: to study change, predict future trends, assess impacts of policies on the water resources systems and provide alternative options- integrated socio-technical assessment frameworks- institutional assessments to evaluate policy implications
Components
DSSs to model the system - empirical evidences -consisting of coupled tools such as process, planning and evaluation models and tools statistical and multi-criteria decision-making (MCDA) tools.
stakeholder participation platform – clear policy on enabling environment - feedback mechanisms
Living with uncertainty
Recommendation 1
The scientific uncertainty of any analytical assessment -limit the authority of scientific knowledge in policy makingThe scientific ambiguity serves both policymakers and scientists: it can be used as an alibi in accounting for a lack of policy effectiveness. However this should not affect the importance of scientific knowledge in decision making as uncertainty is a byproduct of analyzing complex issues
uncertainty is a byproduct of analyzing complex issues
DSSs are not for policymaking
Recommendation 2
support the decision-making process
despite scepticisms and uncertainties, modelling systems have become indispensable tools in water resources managementPast research indicates that decision makers are becoming more dependent on scientific information (e.g. Matthies et al, 2007; Liu et al, 2008) and hence there is a quest for developing comprehensive DSSs;
a tool to facilitate an informed, transparent and participatory decision-
making processcertain end-users expect the so called ‘super’ software which can make decisions with a click of a button i.e. they require instantaneous answers to extremely intricate situations.DSSs are not off-the-shelf software packages but they are interactive multi-stakeholder decision-making platforms. A DSS is not a tool for making-policy but it is.
first, establishing the relationships between the dominant paradigms (e.g. IWRM) and different analytical frameworks (e.g. Institutional Analysis, DPSIR);
and second, linking social (policy) and scientific methodological approaches through an exchange mechanism among outputs of the frameworks used in the Decision Support tools.
integrated methodological framework
An evolving IWRM
An IWRM approach can use scenario analysis which is embedded in the DPSIR framework. This will interface with the IA framework. The interface between science and policy can be established by looking at integrating technical and social assessment methodologies on a dynamic, interactive multi-windowed stakeholder interface platform. The IWRM paradigm will itself need to evolve to embrace emerging issues such as the management of ‘green’ water and accounting for virtual water.
Perspectives and ethics
Polices to deal with water scarcity in WANA region are influenced by cultural and ethical aspects which represent a dimension of the community attributes which has to be considered in any policy analysis exercise. On the above basis, it is argued that it is vital to incorporate ethical perspectives into integrated institutional and technical frameworks for better water resources management under water scarcity
Science and water policy interface
an interface between scientific knowledge systems and policy-making decisions.
Conclusions
Given the complex nature of water scarcity in the WANA region, finding the science –policy interface is vital to enhance the policymaking process in the region.
In the WANA region in which water scarcity is a fact of life, water sector institutions need to be re-oriented to cater for the needs of changing supply-demand and quantity-quality relationships in the emerging realities
Thank you
Water Resources Group
School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Newcastle University,
UK
Questions?