IWRM: FROM INTERNATIONAL THEORY TO NATIONAL PRACTICE

Farhad MukhtarovPhD Candidate

Central European UniversityBudapest, Hungary

External ReadersDr. Aleh Cherp (CEU)Dr. Caroline Sulivan (Oxford)Dr. Yael Parag (Oxford)Dr. Diane Stone (Warwick)Dr. Gill Walt (London)Dr. Paul Josephson (Colby)

2

IWRM conceptual foundations

1. IWRM is a normative and prescriptive concept;

2. IWRM is a discoursive concept for Global Water Governance ;

(Varady 2005; Conca 2006; WB 2003)

IWRM is: a) integrationb) sustainabilityc) participation

Vast theoretical and case studyliterature (GWP, NeWater,Biswas, Mitchell, Jeffrey and Gearey etc.);Thelwall (2005): 41 381 HTML and 28 735 PDF)

The Global Survey by the GWP (2006)

IWRM plan or the IWRM process developed

Moderate success in IWRM planning

Initial progress in IWRM planning

3

IWRM as a normative concept 1

• Fallacy of Predetermination– Embodied in “Rational Comprehensive Planning”

(“predict and prepare” and “contingency planning” (Jeffrey & Gearey 2006);

1) prepare for inevitable;2) preempting the undesirable;3) controlling the controllable;

• Fallacy of Detachment- Separation of planning & implementation- Top-down and centralized

If only you dumbbells appreciated the brilliance of

the strategy we formulated…”

If you’re so smart, why didn’t you take into consideration that we are dumbbells???

4

IWRM as a normative concept 2 (History)

• Full-cost recovery – did not happen in the US in Reclamation!

• Comprehensive Rational Planning – did not work in conservation movement!

• Politics is inherent to water (pork barrel system) – even desirable for “PP”…

• “Muddling through” is better under the conditions of uncertainty and “messy problems”.

5

Hypothesis: When the Tail Starts Wagging the Dog

• Single purpose (flood control…)• Multiple purpose (Hoover etc.)• Multiple purpose and multiple means (non-

structural flood control…) -> “messy” and “wicked” problems…

• Globalization and rise of policy networks;• Solutions looking for the problems (IWRM,

RBM, cost-recovery, piped water supply etc.)

6

Policy Transfer and Policy Networks

Transfer of policies (knowledge) between different jurisdictions. Diffusion and “Isomorphism forces”.

+

Policy Network Theories focus on the dynamics of interaction of actors within a given network, patterns over time. Global Networks.

7

IWRM as a discourseGlobal IWRM Rhetoric

Transnational Networks

Regional Epistemic Community and

TANs in the 1960 – 1970-s (IWRA ’72,

“Water International”)

Global Knowledge Networks

The UNEP, WWC, Tokyo Club etc. in

the 1990-s

Global Public Policy Networks: GWP oriented to implementation

in the 2000-s

Mainstream Sustainable Development

Discourse, RIO 1992

Best practices from developed & developing

countries

Co

erci

veM

imic

ryN

orm

ati

ve

1] Formulation, standardization and simplification of IWRM policy

National LevelWaterPolicy

Water Law

Water Admin-on

International Level

8

Case 1: Azerbaijan Water Supply and Sanitation

• Good WS coverage in urban areas, but deceptive…

• Poor infrastructure (1.5 bln USD required)

• Water available 2-4 hours/day

• Water Quality is not warranted

9

Azerbaijan WSS reform

• From 1994 – 2000 Infrastructure only

• 2000 Sector Strategy. Policy Transfer Network Negotiation

• 2002 Presidential Decree #254; Barmek gets the Baku Electricity grid

10

Azerbaijan WSS reform

• 2003, 2004 –Castalia, Nexant, Scott-Wilson report etc.

• In 2004 creation of AzerSu• In 2005 the BTC opened – no leverage for IFIs

to manage water –New Supply Oriented Projects financed from the Oil Fund (Oguz-Gabala)

No privatization or decentralization envisaged in near future – dropped from the agenda

11

Reasons for non-transfer of policies

• Incompatibility of the political and economic system with the “new public mgt” agenda;

• Consultants picked up ready solutions;

• Mimicry – Georgian bad experiences;

• The right moment for institutional changes in mid 1990-s was missed.

12

Case 2: GAP project. Policy transfer or Rhetoric transfer?

• TVA as an inspiration for GAP – “a government organization clothed with power of government and flexibility of a private enterprise” (FDR, 1933);

• Case for national and international factors in planning…

Package of water and land resources development project in the 1970-s

Multi-sectoral, socio-economic regional development programme in the early 1980-s

Sustainable human development project in the 1990-s

13

IWRM and International Relations

• GAP-EU Cooperation (47 mln USD)

• GAP-UNDP Cooperation (5.9 mln USD)

• FAO, UNICEF, WB, UNIDO etc.

• IWRA – Secretary General & Vice-Pres.

• WWC – Governor and Treasurer

• The Tokyo Club

• Academia

Epistemic Community

KNET/GPPN

KNET

14

Recognition

• 2000 Millennium Award from IWRA;

• WB Development Marketplace Competition (2nd place) for local dev-nt;

• Articles Published in popular newspapers

15

Policy/Knowledge Transfer in GAP

• GAP-RDA as an administration (TVA);

• Rhetoric of IWRM taken up from international discourse

• GIDEM project for industry and business etc.

• Regional Development in Turkey (EU accession) is another on-going example

16

Bridging Divides between “IWRM” and “IWRM”

17

IWRM Networks Analysis !!!Sustainability

Rhetoric

IWRM Global Rhetoric

Organizations Regimes ConferencesGlobal Networks and Discourse

National Practice

Capacity-Building

Refining IWRM

18

Summary

• IWRM is both normative and discoursive;

• History matters and the “tail wags the dog” hypothesis;

• Policy Transfer Networks – innovative tool

• Case of Azerbaijan WSS and GAP-Turkey

• Need for bridging the two notions of IWRM and do this through Policy Networks Approach;