tudies ch s ar rese cooperation...edited by: khawar shahzad, abbas hussain, lead pakistan design...

Water Cooperation through LEADership and Institutional Development

National Discourse on Water and Policy ImplicationsCohort 18

RES

EAR

CH S

TUD

IES

LEAD PakistanLeadership for Environment and Development (LEAD) Pakistan, is a think tank that focuses on policy research, public policy engagement, and capability development in the public, private and non-government sectors. In addition to its Leadership Development Programme (since 1995), Climate Action Programme (since 2007), and Water Programme (since 2014), LEAD Pakistan launched three special initiatives in 2015: Pakistan - Towards 2047; Tracking SDGs; and Sustainable Cities. These strategic programmes aim to shape the development discourse in Pakistan and to ensure that the Federal and Provincial governments' development agendas are in line with global trends and commitments.

LEAD Pakistan has been pursuing an ambitious research agenda (policy as well as action research) regarding various dimensions of climate change, environment, water, governance, health, and education, among other sectors. In addition to demand driven research, LEAD Pakistan generates knowledge products, including case studies from its project interventions and key learnings from its events and activities, to keep the national and international development discourse evolving.

With a history of successful delivery of more than 190 development initiatives across 20 years, we look forward to enhancing our impact on development in Pakistan, the region and beyond.

Copyright © 2016 LEAD Pakistan

Edited by: Khawar Shahzad, Abbas Hussain, LEAD Pakistan

Design & Layout by: Abbas Mushtaq, LEAD Pakistan

Produced by: Learning and Knowledge Management Programme, LEAD Pakistan

Cover Photo: Fliker -Online News

All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system.

About Leadership Development Programme

LEAD is renowned for its Flagship Program the Leadership Development Program (LDP), commonly known as the fellowship program. LDP is an innovative capacity building initiative for multi-sectoral mid to senior level professionals in Pakistan. In terms of quality and impact, its capacity building initiatives are world-class, reflecting the organization’s longstanding and close affiliation with LEAD International as well as the rich intellectual resource represented by its staff and external faculty.

LDP is LEAD’s most popular and vibrant capacity building program; it has produced 19 cohorts (batches) to date, with participants attaining skills and knowledge to make them cross-sectoral leaders in their own communities and on the world stage. They come from all sectors of society, and are united by a shared capability and willingness to address sustainability challenges.

There are over 200 professionals from Pakistan and over 2200 LEAD members across the world that have completed this program and have become “Fellows” of LEAD’s global network. They are a unique international network of professionals and training organizations working in all areas of sustainable development. LEAD network members are highly successful leaders working on complex local to global environmental and development issues.


National Discourse on Water and Policy ImplicationsCohort 18

AcknowledgementThe development of four papers on water, through writeshops was not an easy task. Twenty Cohort fellows – the diverse integration of professionals - , participated in periodic talks with experts, engaged in intensive brainstorming sessions, reflected during prolonged reading hours, delved into rigorous research and capacity building process, and extensive coordination throughout 2015, to make it happen. It was more challenging, with most of them allocating significant time out of their busy work schedule and hectic routines, to contribute to the aspired reforms in the water sector.

LEAD Pakistan's team, led by Ms. Hina Lotia, Director Programmes, LEAD Pakistan and supported Mr. Usman Mirza, Associate Coordinator, Water Programmes, LEAD Pakistan, and Mr. Ashfaq Mahmood, Water and Energy expert, was all time busy in visualizing, planning and implementation of the Cohort 18, deserves special credit for its commitment to striving for 'Water Cooperation through Leadership and Institutional Development', an important milestone in its ongoing endeavours, through Water Programme.

We acknowledge endless effort of Cohort 18 – The Water Leaders – by recognizing their contributions of the below papers, as part of Writeshops, which resulted in development of this research publications.

Writeshop 1: Cooperation for Harnessing Benefits of Transboundary Water in Indus Basin

Lead Author: Muhammad Asif Kamran, Agriculture and Biology (NIAB), Faisalabad, Pakistan

Team Members: Muhammad Arif Rashid Goheer, Global Change Impact Studies Centre, PakistanKhalid Saifullah Khan, Oxfam Novib, PakistanSarah Amir, Department of Environmental Sciences International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan

Writeshop 2: Groundwater Challenges, Opportunities and Governance in Pakistan's Indus Basin

Lead Author: Fazilda Nabeel, Department of Economics, Forman Christian College, Pakistan

Team Members: Kamran Soomro, Pakistan Agriculture Research Council (PARC), Karachi, Pakistan Sheraz Memon, Ministry of Water and Power, Government of Pakistan Zareen Abbas Khan, Sustainable Development Policy Institute, Islamabad -

Writeshop 3: Hydro Disasters

Lead Author: Yasir Abbas, Water Resources Division, NESPAK

Team Members: Muhammad Tahir Abbasi, WWF PakistanMuhammad Mohsin Munir, National Engineering Services Pakistan (Pvt) Limited (NESPAK), Pakistan Shabina Faraz, Jang Group of Publications, Karachi

Writeshop 4: Hydro-diplomacy Between Afghanistan and Pakistan

Lead Author: Mehr Saleem, Saleem, Alam & Co., Pakistan

Team Members: Khalid Khan, Muhammad Aurangzaib, Ev-K2-CNR, Pakistan OfficeSana Zia, British High Commission, Islamabad, PakistanFiza Qureshi, Indus Consortium, Pakistan

AcronymsCFA Cooperative Framework AgreementCSO Civil Society OrganizationDMC Disaster Management CenterDRR Disaster Risk ReductionDRM Disaster Risk ManagementEWS Early Warning SystemERC Emergency Relief CellFFC Federal Flood CommissionerFID Federal Irrigation DepartmentFFD Flood Forecasting DivisionGCISC Global Change Impact StudiesLEAD Leadership for Environment and DevelopmentICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain DevelopmentIPCC Intergovernmenatl Panel on Climate ChangeIRS Indus River SystemIRSA Indus River System AuthorityIWMI International Water Management InstituteIWT I ndus Water TreatyMRC Mekong River CommissionNBI Nile Basin InitiativeNDM National Disaster Management NDMO National Disaster Management OrdinanceNDRMF National Disaster Risk Management FrameworkNHA National Highway AuthorityOFWM On-farm Water ManagementPCIW Pakistan Commissioner for Indus WaterPCRWR Pakistan Council of Research in Water ResourcesPID Provincial Irrigation DepartmentPMD Pakistan Meteorological DepartmentPR Pakistan RailwaysPHD Public Health DepartmentSAARC South Asian Association for Regional CooperationSANDEE South Asian Network for Development and Environmental EconomicsSVP Shared Vision ProgramUNISDR United Nations International Strategy for Disaster ReductionWAA Water Apportionment AccordWAPDA Water and Power Development AuthorityWASA Water and Sanitation Authority

Cooperation for Harnessing Benefits of Transboundary Water in Indus Basin

Groundwater Challenges, Opportunities and Governance in Pakistan's Indus Basin

Hydro Disasters

Hydro-diplomacy Between Afghanistan and Pakistan

Ÿ Abstract 10Ÿ Introduction 11Ÿ Need for Transboundary Cooperation 11Ÿ Transboundary Water Agreements and Challenges 11Ÿ Inter-Provincial Mindsets in Pakistan 12Ÿ Barriers to Transboundary Cooperation 12Ÿ Approaches to Deal with Transboundary Water Issues

(Water Sharing Vs Benefit Sharing) Cooperation for Benefit Sharing 13Ÿ Lessons from International Experiences 13Ÿ Institutional Strengthening 14Ÿ Way Forward 15Ÿ References 16

Ÿ Abstract 20Ÿ Introduction - Groundwater as Significant Natural Resource – Global Context 21Ÿ Groundwater Use, Equity and Sustainability in Pakistan 21Ÿ Hazards from Unsustainable Use of Groundwater in Pakistan's Indus Basin 23Ÿ Institutional, Legal and Policy Environment for Groundwater Governance

in Pakistan 23Ÿ Towards Sustainable Groundwater Use in Pakistan: Way Forward 24Ÿ References 25

Ÿ Abstract 30Ÿ Introduction 31Ÿ Institutional Response and System Empowerment 31Ÿ Management of Hydro Disasters and Building Resilience 33Ÿ Way Forward 35Ÿ Strategies to Curb Transformation of Hazards into Disasters 35Ÿ References 36

Ÿ Abstract 40Ÿ Introduction 41Ÿ Water Resources and Challenges 42Ÿ Application of Hydro-diplomacy Between Afghanistan and Pakistan 45Ÿ Strategy and Action Plan to Execute Hydro-diplomacy Between

Afghanistan and Pakistan - Way Forward 47

Table of Content

1

2

3

4


Ÿ Introduction 04Ÿ Leadership Development Program: Cohort 18 - 2015 05Ÿ Status of Pakistan's Water Resources 05Ÿ Water Consumption 05Ÿ Hydro-disasters 06Ÿ Issues and Threats 06Ÿ Water Institutions 06

ForewordLeadership for Environment and Development (LEAD Pakistan) believes in adopting long term and programmatic approach on water related national and regional issues. The Water Programme at LEAD Pakistan, makes informed contribution to the dialogue on water, and the subsequent conceptual framing of approaches and solutions, through its long history of providing leadership in the field of environment and sustainable development.

Consistent with its history of providing thought leadership, LEAD Pakistan, through its Water Programme, launched Cohort 18 of its flagship Leadership Development Program (LDP), commonly known as the LEAD fellowship. LDP is an innovative capacity building initiative for multi-sectoral, mid-level professionals in Pakistan. Building on LEAD Pakistan's strengths in capacity building, research and public policy engagement, the LDP aimed to enhance skills, knowledge and understanding of a group of early/mid-career professionals/researchers in the interdisciplinary area of Water. The theme of this year's LDP not only resonates the imminent need to focus on Water, but also highlights the commitment of LEAD Pakistan to invest in developing future Water Leaders. The knowledge outputs from the LDP will gear towards contributing to the national discourse on water, and engaging relevant policy makers to think and find innovative and integrated solutions.

Water cohort is designed to integrate components of capacity building and research. This compendium comes as major research output produced by cohort associates, under the yearlong fellowship. The compendium is a one of its kind initiative, where a group of young professionals experiences an intensive training routine and documents its learning in a research output, under guidance of eminent water sector experts. Each chapter reflects a key topic or area critical to understanding the water challenge of Pakistan. The associates, through these chapters have provided a comprehensive, yet succinct perspective to comprehend the multifaceted, vital and complex resource, that water is for Pakistan. We hope that this compendium will be used as a guide for early career profession, who want to get a taste of extensive water sector.

Ali T. SheikhCEO, LEAD Pakistan

01

Introduction


Water, is the basic need and prerequisite for socio-economic development, especially in agro-based economies like Pakistan. Agriculture sector contributes to about 21-23 % of Pakistan's GDP and employs about 80% of rural work force. About 60 to 70% of country's exports are based on agricultural produces. About 64% of population of Pakistan is dependent on agriculture. Water is also the cheapest source for production of electricity. However, water sector in Pakistan is facing a variety of challenges which require visionary leadership, understanding of issues and institutional strength for their resolution.

04

© LEAD Pakistan

Leadership Development Program: Cohort 18 - 2015Despite vital importance of water resources for Pakistan, there is limited knowledge, understanding and capacity of key institutions to effectively manage transboundary water resources and promote cooperation. This often translates into policies devoid of on-ground realities, research and evidence. Consistent with its history of providing thought leadership, LEAD Pakistan, launched Cohort 18 of its flagship Leadership Development Program (LDP), commonly known as the LEAD fellowship, in 2015, on “Water Cooperation through Leadership and Institutional Development”. The Cohort 18 aimed supplementing the LEAD Pakistan's Water Programme, which aims Highlighting Integrated Perspective on Water. Our water initiative is bringing back the focus on a broader range of values that a society realizes through water. The aim is to incorporate social, economic and environmental aspects to water discourse, policies and programs at national and international levels, in a well-defined area guided by our programme framework, based on the three crosscutting thematic areas of Access, Equity and Hazards.

The cohort theme focused on transboundary water resources, to bring forward the younger generation in addressing future challenges. Members of Cohort 18 were exposed to various facets of the water sector in Pakistan, through invited talks from experts and intensive interactions with them. They also received exposure through case studies and role play exercises. The participants, from diverse professional backgrounds were encouraged to brainstorm and reflect over water issues and challenges, to recommend sustainable solutions.

At the end of each learning session, a group of participants formed 'Writeshops' and developed papers on Institutions Managing Water, Groundwater, Hydro-disasters and Hydro-diplomacy. Thus, Cohort's water visionaries, contributed in bridging knowledge, research and capacity gaps, in the field of transboundary water resources. The associates, provided comprehensive, yet succinct perceptive, through these contributions, to comprehend the multifaceted, vital and complex resource that water is for Pakistan. The knowledge outputs aim contributing to the national discourse on water and engaging relevant policy makers to think over and find innovative and integrated solutions. Each 'Writeshop' reflects a key topic or area, critical to understanding the water challenges of Pakistan. We hope that this compendium will be used as a guide for early career professionals.

Status of Pakistan's Water ResourcesPakistan's water resources comprise surface water, mainly received by Indus Basin rivers, rain and groundwater. All Indus Basin rivers are transboundary rivers, as these originate across Pakistan's geographical boundaries. The water of the rivers flowing in Pakistan across its Eastern

border with India and Line of Control was divided between the two counties, as a result of settlement of water issue in 1960, under Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). As a result, unrestricted use of waters of three rivers, namely Indus, Jhelum and Chenab, was allocated to Pakistan, while India was allowed unrestricted use of waters of Ravi, Sutlej and Beas, with some exceptions in both the cases. On the Western side, Pakistan receives water from Kabul River flowing through Afghanistan across the Durand Line. Pakistan's Chitral River contributes to over 50 % of the water of the Kabul River. Pakistan receives about 80 % of the river water from snow and glacier melt. In all, on the average, barrages at canal heads receive about 141 Million Acre Feet (MAF) of water. Maximum flows of 172 MAF and minimum flows of 97 MAF have been recorded in the rivers. About 82 % of this is received in the Kharif Season (15 April to 15 October), while the remaining 18 % is received in the Rabi Season (October 16th to April 14th).

Rainfall patterns in Pakistan vary across the country. Pakistan is one of the world's most arid countries – over 75% of it receives rainfall less than 250 mm annually, and 20% of it receives less than 125 mm. On the average, 13 MAF of water contributes to agriculture.

Groundwater is a very important resource for agriculture and domestic consumption. It contributes to about 50 % of irrigation water and caters to domestic needs of over 90 % of the population. It is conveniently available near the location of demand and can be tapped at the time of use. According to estimates, sustainable balance between recharge of aquifers and water extraction is around 55 MAF. However, large scale proliferation of tube wells has resulted in extraction of water, surpassing this sustainability limit. Water extraction has lowered the water table to alarmingly low levels in many parts of the country, thus endangering this valuable resource.

Water ConsumptionOn the consumption side, about 93 % of water is consumed in agriculture and the rest is used for drinking, domestic use, sanitation, industry, mining and other sectors. This pattern is, however, changing due to competing demands for water from household sector, as a result of increase in population and urbanization, and growth in industrial and mining sectors. Agricultural water use practices in Pakistan are very inefficient, in comparison to the world standards. According to experts, overall water use efficiency isabout 42 % in Pakistan, which can be increased to 55 %, through application of efficient technologies. Efficient water consumption technologies, such as laser land levelling, raised bed plantation, drip irrigation etc. have not yet proliferated to a large extent in rural Pakistan. Water management practices are also mostly rudimentary. Consumption of water is on the rise in the domestic sector, due to rapid urbanization and unmetered supply. Water pricing in agriculture and domestic sector is nominal.

Introduction

05

Hydro-disastersFrom ancient times, human developments are riveted along water bodies (Lakes, Rivers, Sea, etc.,) due to various human requirements, which include food, drinking water, transport/ communication, hygiene, and agriculture, along floodplains. Simultaneously, human developments along water bodies are also exposed to various water related disasters. The exposure and vulnerability to “Hydro-Disasters” has been observed to be gradually increasing with population growth, increasing use for agriculture and climatic changes. Sea intrusion has increased, ecosystems damaged, and thousands of acres of fertile land lost, in Thatta and Badin districts, over the years. The fertile lands, where once crops used to grow, have turned barren and arid. Groundwater salinity has increased, making it unusable.

Floods, droughts, and cloud bursts are among other most common and damaging hydro disasters. Climate change is altering monsoon and rainfall patterns, which may lead to more severe and less predictable flooding and droughts. The poorest of the poor are the most exposed to the vagaries of hydro disasters.

Issues and Threats Pakistan is facing several threats to its water availability. Per capita availability of water, which was about 5,500 cubic meters in 1947/1948 has been reduced to less than 1,000 cubic meters, thus making Pakistan a water scarce country. This is primarily due to population growth and distribution of water between Pakistan and India as a result of IWT. As population continues to grow, Pakistan is projected to become severely water scarce in a matter of few years. Prospective multiplied growth in population will have dire consequences on livelihoods, economy, environment and the society, as whole. Secondly, the surface water resources are under threat owing to climate change. Climate change studies show that there will be 8.4-10% reduction in precipitation by 2050. Rains and snow/glacier melt flows in summer will be concentrated in a shorter time span (two months), causing high intensity floods more frequently than before and prolonged dry spells (droughts). In the longer run, the Hindukush-Himalayan glaciers will shrink and annual water resources will decrease. Reduced availability of surface water and increased demand for agricultural production will further exert pressure on groundwater resources. Groundwater extraction, which has already exceeded the sustainable limit of 55 MAF, will further increase. Not only will it lower the water table in different location, it will also affect the quality of sub-surface water by leaching salts, as a consequence of extensive drilling. Increased urbanization and competing demands from other sectors will reduce water availability for agriculture. Quality of drinking water is being severely affected due to seepage of sanitation water, chemicals and disposal of untreated urban wastes. Availability of water is also facing threats due to increasing use across the border.

Pakistan receives about 18 MAF of water from Kabul River. Increasing uses in Afghanistan, particularly use in Kabul City and construction of dams and hydro projects may reduce availability of water to Pakistan from Kabul River. On the Eastern side, though Pakistan and India have signed Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), Pakistan remains concerned about India's hydroelectric dams on Wester Rivers (allocated to Pakistan), apprehending violations of the design criteria for such dams. Moreover, proliferation of tube wells in India in the areas adjoining Pakistan at heavily subsidized electricity rates is causing accelerated depletion of aquifers and lowering of water tables in Pakistan at alarming rates. Most of the area of the watersheds of rivers, which lies in the neighboring countries is beyond Pakistan's domain. Poor watershed management has is resulted in increasing the silt load in the rivers, causing faster silting of dams and changes in river morphology. However, the most worrying matter is the lack of harmony, foresight and preparedness in the wake of challenges of water scarcity. A lack of mutual trust still haunts the full development of water potential. Seasonal variability of water is likely to increase due to climate change. But the construction of new water reservoirs is still held up. On average, 31 MAF of water flows into the Arabian sea, annually. Intense rains and high river flows lead to floods and losses of life, assets and infrastructure. However, these problems fester on owing to water mismanagement and the tendency of stakeholders to be driven by ulterior political motoves.

Water InstitutionsWater institutions can play an important role in addressing the issues and challenges in water sector. However, the existing state of institutions in Pakistan is a matter of concern. Ministry of Water and Power, Indus River System Authority (IRSA), Pakistan Commission for Indus Waters (PCIW), Federal Flood Commission (FFC) and Pakistan Metrological Department (PMD) are understaffed and need continued upgradation in knowledge and insulation from political interferences. Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) stagnated after establishment of the Indus Basin Works. The Provincial Irrigation Departments (PIDs) and agricultural departments have also not modernized. Water and Sewerage Authorities (WASAs) are poorly staffed, mismanaged and own predominantly substandard infrastructure. Academic institutions are also not teaching and training students on water technologies, practices, knowledge and management, nor is the Higher Education Commission prioritising these.

Water Cooperation through Leadership and Institutional Development

06

Cooperation for Harnessing Benefits ofTransboundary Water in Indus Basin

Writeshop 1

AbstractWater is a pre-requisite for development and among the most shared resources in the world. This sharing of water resources and the time frame and extent to which it is to be done, can be controlled and managed on a short or long term basis depending on the source/s, and status as either upper or lower riparian beneficiaries. Governance of water resource/s by political, rather than ecosystem considerations poses a serious threat to equitable distribution of this vital resource and its management institutions. Moreover a trust deficit between the stakeholders and the history of conflict which exists between them, adds to the problem.

The present study is designed to understand Pakistan's interprovincial and transboundary water governance challenges from historical and institutional perspectives. It is an effort to assess effectiveness of the Indus water Treaty (IWT) in response to climatic and demographic challenges. It explores factors that trigger trust deficit, such as institutional factors, poor data sharing mechanism and practice, stagnant bureaucratic mindset, poor hydro-diplomacy, politicization of issues on channels of mass communication and poor coordination on new projects and developments. Emerging climate change scenario and concerns about environmental flows, usage of transboundary groundwater and water pollution due to sources across the borders; all pose serious challenges to IWT.

The study concludes that the interprovincial and transboundary water issues can be best tackled through financial autonomy and technical strengthening of the transboundary organizations. These issues can be effectively resolved by bringing about a paradigm shift in the approach to water sharing; from engineering to socio-technical and from water sharing to a benefit sharing approach. The goals of using water to harness peace and prosperity rather than conflicts and adversity in the region, can be achieved through Track-II diplomacy, integrated water management, revision of water contract on the principles of benefit sharing and trust building at all levels with the help of autonomous water institutions, and above all, by political will to do it.

10

© Development Lense

IntroductionWe live in a world overwhelmingly shaped by ideological, religious, and political realities. A classic example is that of water flow, which crosses physical/political boundaries. Water flows at different levels, for example from basin, sub-basin, national, provincial, to farm-level. Various issues often emerge between upper and lower riparian or water recipients as water is among the most shared and conflicted resources in the world.

Factors, such as burgeoning population, climate change, and deterioration of water quality due to human activities threaten surface water. The most vulnerable segment of the population; poorest of the poor; faces multidimensional issues of access, equity and hazards due to these challenges. Transboundary issues, mostly based on political interests, whether at the international or provincial or more generally the upper riparian vs lower riparian divide levels, obscure the need to prepare for dealing with the emerging challenges, through integrated water management of the river basins. This myopia is bound to exacerbate transboundary water issues in the future in the Indus Basin, particularly effecting relations between Pakistan and India and to some extent between Pakistan and Afghanistan. The challenge for the leadership is to rise above the level of the geographical boundaries and deal with water related chal lenges, through mutual cooperat ion. Such collaboration can yield maximum benefits, through judicious benefit sharing.

This paper discusses the need for transboundary and national level cooperation in the context of Pakistan. Its somewhat generic scope encompasses international and interprovincial transboundary issues and challenges. There are many similarities in the issues across political boundaries, whether provincial or international. The key questions and issues addressed through this study are:

æWhy is cooperation needed?

æWhat is the Indo-Pakistan mindset on transboundary waters?

æ3. What are the Interprovincial convictions in Pakistan with regard to water?

æ4. What are the barriers to transboundary cooperation at the national and international level?

æ5. What are the possible approaches to deal with transboundary water issues (Water sharing Vs Benefit sharing)

æ6. What are the lessons learnt from international experiences?

æ7. What institutional architecture and capacity is needed to address the need for cooperation?

æ8. What is the way forward for the political leadership?

Need for Transboundary CooperationSurface water is coming under threats because of a burgeoning population and flow regime variability due to climate changes (Mancosu et al., 2015). Factors like decreasing per capita water availability and increasing demand have exacerbated the problem, resulting in competing claims by upper and lower riparian. Trust deficit, s e l fi s h m i n d s e t s a n d g e o g r a p h i c a l advantages/disadvantages obscure the need to harness maximum benefits from water for the people, irrespective of the geographic divide.

Climate change has emerged as a menace, although there is high uncertainty on how exactly these changes will manifest. Impact of climate change on Himalayan cryosphere is obvious from 21% deglaciation of 466 glaciers in the three major basins since 1962, which is supported by data of early snowmelt and resulting increased flows during winters (Kulkarni et al., 2007).The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in its third assessment report, has reported that there will be an increase in the South Asian monsoon by 8–24% (Rasul et al., 2008). Monsoons will be concentrated in a smaller time span. This monsoon pattern, coupled with increased glacial and snow melt, has increased the probability of high floods, which can cause widespread devastation and misery in this part of the world. Moreover, water availability in the non-monsoon periods is projected to be scarcer than before. The overall availability of water is likely to increase in the short run. However, long run projections show marked decline. Modeling of the Upper Indus by Immerzeel et al (2010) indicated that some 34% of the total stream flow in this area is generated by snowmelt, 26% from glacier melt, and such findings are corroborated by Bookhagen and Burbank (2010). The Indus Basin ranks in the top ten of the world's most vulnerable basins with inflows predicted to fall by 27% by 2050 (IPCC 2001). Many new technologies and water use practices have also been developed in different regions. There is need of sharing knowledge, technologies and practices among stakeholders for harnessing the maximum possible benefits for peoplewhose lives are connected with water. Promotion of cooperation is thus the need of the hour.

Transboundary Water Agreements and Challenges Partition of the subcontinent in 1947 divided the natural Indus Basin boundary between India and Pakistan. The Indus Basin covers an area of about 1.10 million square kilometres (km2 ) distributed between Pakistan (63%), India (29%), and China and Afghanistan (8%) (Jain et al., 2009). The Indus has two main tributaries, Panjnad,


11

comprising Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej from the east, and Kabul River, flowing through Afghanistan, on the west. India (upper riparian) and Pakistan (lower riparian) disputed the shares of waters, rights and obligations of each party in respect of the rivers of the Indus Basin (excluding Kabul) after partition.

Years of negotiations under the aegis of the World Bank (Gulhati, N.D. 1973 for details about international mediation process), finally led to signing of the Indus Water Treaty of 1960 (also referred to as IWT or the Treaty in remainder of this paper). Pakistan draws about 2/3rd of the water used in the basin; and the rest is used by India. According to the Treaty, waters of the Sutlej, Beas and Ravi (called the Eastern Rivers) were allocated to India, and Pakistan received unrestricted and exclusive use of waters of the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab (called the Western Rivers), which India is under obligation to let uninterruptedly flow. Furthermore, under the treaty, India is required to let flow all waters of the Western Rivers and cannot interfere with these waters except for certain uses, namely; domestic use, non-consumptive use, agricultural use, and generation of hydro-electric power. Similarly, except for domestic, non-consumptive and specified agricultural uses, Pakistan can't interfere water of any tributary joining main Sutlej and Ravi (IWT, 1960). Pakistan blames India for designing projects which do not comply with the criteria laid down in the Treaty, an unobliging attitude in the provision of data, occasional release of water in Eastern Rivers without warning which causes floods, trying to use waters of the Western Rivers beyond permissible limits, water pollution, over extraction of groundwater in border areas and the avoidance of dispute resolution mechanism, in case there is a dispute. With growing ecological concerns and awareness, Pakistan also demands environmental flows on the Eastern Rivers (there was no such explicit provisions in the Treaty).

Interprovincial Water Agreements and Challenges Interprovincial disputes predate the partition of India. After independence, water sharing in Pakistan had been on an ad hoc basis. However, due to the growing demand and signing of the Indus Waters Treaty, it became necessary that provinces should come to an accord with regard to their rights on water. Water Apportionment Accord (WAA) 1991 was signed among the Provinces in 1991. The accord gives autonomy to provinces to use their share of water on a 10 day rotation criteria. However, provinces, particularly Sindh and Punjab, conflicted over the interpretation of the accord.

These conflicts relate to the blame of withdrawal of more water than the share by upper riparian provinces, historical basis of water distribution versus distribution according to the 1991 accord (see Gilmartin, 2015 for details about water conflict between Sindh and Punjab in British times),

the sharing of shortages, and provision of data and timings of filling up of reservoirs. Other issues include the release of water below Kotri barrage in Sindh to dilute salinity of drinking water, check sea-water intrusion and sustain mangroves and fish culture. International transboundary affairs like mistrust, data hiding, and lack of coordination and integrated efforts have resulted in a lack of cooperation among the upper and lower riparian.

At the national level, there is insignificant coordination between federal and provincial agencies. The divergent objectives of major organizations, like WAPDA, IRSA, PIDs, On-farm Water Management (OFWM), Water and Sanitation Authority (WASA) and Public Health departments (PHDs), need to be harmonized.

Barriers to Transboundary Cooperation Typically, the barriers to Transboundary water cooperation at the national and international levels are:

æ Trust deficit among riparian states/provinces.

æ Lack of coordination, and integrated efforts at all levels.

æ Lack of timely sharing of adequate data.

æReduced environmental flows.

æAbsence of (on environmental flows, groundwater, water quality), ambiguities on (mainly definition of non-consumptive and historical uses), or violations of agreements (building reservoirs from Indian side).

æNegative and nonfactual propaganda, through media

æ Emotive statements by political leaders, opinion makers, media anchors, and lobbies, etc.

æ Security Concerns due to territorial disputes and history of armed conflicts

æ Fixed mindsets of rights over historical flows.

æ Lack of understanding regarding attaining of powerful position and maximum benefits, through mutual cooperation.

æ Lack of coordinated efforts between research organizations, resulting in insufficient research and documentation. The situation further aggravated due to i n s u f fi c i e n t r e s e a r c h f u n d s a n d p o o r knowledge/information management about the emerging issues like climate change, glaciers melt.


12

Approaches to Deal with Transboundary Water Issues (Water Sharing Versus Benefit Sharing) Cooperation for Benefit SharingSurface water is under threat because of issues like a burgeoning population, climate change, and quality deterioration. The most vulnerable segment of the populat ion i s poorest of the poor, who face multidimensional issues of access, equity and hazards due to these challenges. Ecosystems are under increasing pressure from human activities like a rise in settlements, industrialization, mining and agriculture. In the Indus Basin, millions of people lack sufficient access to water. This situation demands that instead of quarrelling about quantitative shares and the allocation of water, efforts should be made to harness water as a value, whose benefits can be shared through effective management.

IWT between Pakistan and India and the water accord between provinces in Pakistan are essentially based on the principle of division of water among parties. The fundamental problem with such accords is that the concerned parties are more occupied in ensuring their share of water rather than maximizing the benefits of water which can then be shared equitably. Thus in many cases, the groups may secure their shares and end up wasting or inefficiently using the resource. The same “surplus” water if used prudently in the territory of the stakeholders may produce more benefits, which if shared judiciously among the parties can bring more value and well-being for the people at basin level.

The resource sharing issues resound with conflicts over the distribution of physical units. In this context, benefit sharing has emerged as a positive sum solution focused towards benefits derived from the common resources -economic, social, political, and ecological-, rather than physical resource units per se. The concept, though well-conceived by researchers, faces implementation issues, emerging because of differences in historical rights and resource use, estimation of non-monetary benefits, and variation in upper and lower riparian perspective. Benefit sharing has a potential to build cooperation for variety of benefits, including sustainable use of river, efficient use of water for food and energy to maximize benefits from water, reduced wastage of resource and lower transaction costs due to cooperative management and additional benefits gained through peace and mutually beneficial trade.

Political will and commitment from all governments, at all levels, are prerequisites for successful transboundary water management. There is no universal formula, as benefits depend upon the area in which water flows, though literature is available on this subject. Some examples are discussed in the following section. The best approach is that the parties themselves determine benefits, taking the basin as a whole, and decide the details of physical infrastructure and management practices needed to

maximize benefits. They may then decide among themselves as to how the benefits will be shared equitably.

Lessons from International ExperiencesThere are many examples of successful cooperative arrangements for benefit sharing in the world. The fundamental requirement is that of an institutional arrangement where parties can professionally discuss water matters and resolve issues in accordance with treatise/agreements, or even those, which were not envisaged in the time old treatise/agreements. Open and honest data sharing is the key to building trust. Whenever the parties have not been able to resolve the matter, a reference of the matter to third parties in the spirit of cooperation has proved successful. Apportionment of water shares is a concept of the past there is a moving trend towardsbenefit sharing, rather than water sharing.

For example, in the case of Mekong River, interstate cooperation through the establishment of Mekong River Commission (MRC) in 1955, led to a cooperative membership, thus ending history of clashes between the governments of Cambodia, Lao BDR, Thailand and Vietnam. These countries defined principles of mutual cooperation and river basin management to protect the river from pollution, improving institutional capacities in water management and just distribution and allocation of river water, with intentions to benefit all stakeholder countries (Jacobs, 2002). The MRC consists of three bodies: the Council, the Joint Committee and the Secretariat. The MRC Council consists of one member from each participating country at the ministerial level, meeting once a year to take policy decisions. The Joint Committee consists of one member from each party at no less than the head of department level. It implements decisions of the Council, besides supervising activities of the Secretariat. The Secretariat of MRC operates from Vientiane, Lao PDR to provide technical and administrative services under direction of Chief Executive Officer, who is normally not a citizen of a riparian Party. National chapters of MRC coordinate national level implementation of MRC programmes. Besides, there are various other institutions and mechanisms, such as Donor Consultative Group and independent auditor to ensure financial transparency (UNECE, 2009).

The institutional framework for Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) comprises Council of Ministers, which seeks advice from the NBI Technical Advisory Committee and NBI Secretariat. NBI is a 10-Member intergovernmental partnership institution guided by a Shared Vision objective to 'achieve sustainable socio-economic development, through equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the common Nile Basin water resources'. Member states include Burundi, DR Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, The Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda. Eritrea participates as an observer. (NBI, 2014) Key positions in these committees


13

periodically rotate among participating countries. Negotiations of the five upstream countries are in progress on the 'Cooperative Framework Agreement' (CFA), under auspices of NBI. CFA aims at allocating more water from the River Nile to these countries. The endorsed agreement would result in constitution of Nile River Basin Commission, which would replace NBI. From surface water sharing point of view, the most interesting feature of NBI is its Shared Vision Program (SVP). Besides various initiatives, such as building institutions, sharing benefits and joint problem solving, the SVP has explicit provisions for sharing data and information on variability of flow. Interestingly, neither NBI nor the proposed Nile River Basin Commission advocate fixed water shares for each riparian country, which indicates the flexibility of agreement for flow regime variability.

By the year 2000, there were more than 150 agreements on trans-boundary waters in the Europe (UNECE, 2009). European countries have developed a common understanding on water management along with other interstate agreements. The European Water Process is one of the institutions responsible for managing water resources in all European states. It is primarily responsible for updating policies and strategies for European water management. European Water Process presented their policy document on fifth world water forum. The document elaborates their existing management overview, status and situation of water in Europe and policy vision for the future of European waters. The European nations have focused on water infrastructure and institutions within and across states boundaries, aimed at ensuring sustainable economic growth and development of Europe. Towards this goal, they have introduced strongly integrated policy frameworks, which are more responsive to climate change and energy challenges. They have prioritized on public awareness raising regarding water related policies and environmental and political challenges, guided by the belief that only informed public can contribute to manage European water at personal and collective levels. Under NBI, there was no mechanism of sharing groundwater. However, later the countries joined to mainstream groundwater considerations into integrated management of Nile River Basin, through a project funded by GEF in 2007. Based on the case of cooperation among Mali, Mauritania and Senegal over management of Senegal River and cooperation between Lesotho and South over the Orange River, Sadoff and Grey (2002) found that transboundary River problems can be solved by regime formation that not only leads to constructive mutual benefits but also in the sharing of economic benefits.

The Mexico/US transboundary rivers treaty of 1944 is an example with a provision for both parties to adopt a 'Minute' agreement under the main treaty to take joint or coordinated investment decisions or interpretation of the treaty with mutual consensus (Brown, 2003).

The Israel-Jordan Treaty of 1994 on amicable sharing of ground and surface transboundary water is another example. Both parties understand that water related decisions have potential for developing peace and airing conflict. The treaty establishes a remarkable example of benefit sharing, by allowing Jordan to store 20 million cubic meters of water in Lake Tiberias in Israel for its winter use, and in return, allowing Israel to extract 12 million cubic meters during summer and 13 million during winter from the Yarmouk river. Israel being more developed than Jordan also offered technological support to Jordan for efficient water management (Lawrence and Islam, 2012).

Institutional StrengtheningSelf-governing local and transboundary institutions are considered as pre-requisite for sustainable and collective resource management (Ostrom, 1990; Kamran and Shivakoti, 2013). Clarity in roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders is important to success of governance structure from national to local levels. At the national level, there is need to build better coordination between ministries and provide financial support backed by strong political commitment. Common obstacles to collective and efficient management include duplicity of functions performed by different institutions, conflicting mandates, fragmented authority and limited capacity of the existing institutions.

The issues at the national level are also reflected in sub-national and transboundary resource management institutions. At the transboundary level, there is an additional requirement to build strong institutions delegated with financial and enforcement autonomy to effectively govern resources while working under different governmental entities. Apart from corrective measures in resource governance at local, national and transboundary levels, a variety of actors – local stakeholders, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), autonomous research institutions, private sector participants and donors – must be engaged in integrated efforts geared towards achieving sustainable resource development. Interaction and cooperation between stakeholders of varying capacities, working at different political and ecological scales can contribute to success. Vertical and horizontal integration is essential. Formation or development of the joint bodies and commissions offer the best possibility for such integration.

To be effective, joint bodies for transboundary cooperation should pursue; information coordination and advisory role (e.g. exchange of hydrological and metrological information); formulation of joint projects to fill policy and knowledge gaps (e.g. telemetry and early warning systems); establishment of well-defined resource and user boundaries; and effective conflict resolution mechanisms and arbitration.


14

1

2

3

1- http://iwlearn.net/iw-projects/3321 ~ 2- norm- and rule based cooperation for that takes into account a combination of power, interest, knowledge and context for the political resolution of problems and conflicts in the field of international river basin management (Krasner, 1983)3- http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpolicy/peace/guide/pages/israel-jordan/peacetreaty/annexii.aspx

At the international level, the existing regional institutions, like ICIMOD (International Center for Integrated Mountain Development), IWMI (International Water Management Institute) and SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) can be used to develop better diplomatic relations. The knowledge networks like SANDEE (South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics), GCISC (Global Change Impact Studies and LEAD (Leadership for Environment and Development) can be used to promote scholarship, scientific solutions, science based approach to build trust and dilute or alleviate stakeholders' misperceptions regarding the key trans-boundary water and ecosystem related issues.

The national organizations like IRSA, WAPDA, PARC, PCRWR, GCISC, integrated as joint body, can help in formulation of science based policy and information sharing to resolve inter-provincial conflicts ranging from water distribution to environmental flows.

Specific terms of references and rules should guide institutions working on transboundary, national, provincial, local scales, regarding their role, responsibilities, financial status, and civic engagement for water management at basin, river, canal, and water course level. Effectiveness of joint bodies is dependent on institutional dynamism and human capital. Institutional ecosystem should focus on ensuring development and sustaining of appropriate conditions to flourish and sustain. Capacity building and orientation of staff to work in interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary settings can bridge the knowledge as well disciplinary gaps.

Way ForwardFollowing key guidelines may help in improving cooperation in Indus Basin to maintain healthy economies and ecosystems based on the Indus River:

1. Trust building is a prerequisite in resolving disputes, like water issues. Trust building measures will work only when both parties renounce the zero-sum mind set and converge on a point that water is a flexible resource, and all processes and mechanisms should lead to adding value to water. Parties should reach on an agreement by removing all uncertainties through dialogue and ongoing coordination, whether these may be regarding information sharing, action or perception.

2. Bridging of knowledge gaps through development of new knowledge resource and management of existing knowledge can perform a crucial role in the success of transboundary negotiations. Despite the fact that increasing interest in these issues has already resulted in producing crucial knowledge, trust in generated knowledge has become an area of concern. This owes to a lack of cross country comparisons, and collaboration among

experts across borders for joint production of knowledge. There is a need to build and strengthen regional knowledge networks and develop standardized guidelines and skills to conduct studies on critical transboundary nature issues. The establishment of a scientific information system and joint metrological facilities for real-time monitoring of river dynamics supported by a well-developed reporting mechanism for official as well as research use can be a step in the right direction.

3. Formulation of Indus Commission on a permanent basis, assigned with a clear mandate and empowered through all required supporting institutions can prove to be a significant step forward in managing the Indus Basin. Financial resources should be allocated for the Commission to implement joint activities in a timely manner, along with the mandate to liaise with international donors.

4. IRSA is responsible for distribution of water among provinces. It also assists provinces to share water shortages in a given year, according to the Water Apportionment Accord of 1991. There is a need to strengthen IRSA and its water distribution and related data sharing mechanism to enable effective coordination and information sharing.

5. A mechanism should be developed for public participation and expediting track-II diplomacy and accommodating resulting concerns and recommendations.

6. Undertake joint programmes, such as:

Ÿ Collective efforts and vision needed to decrease water losses and improve water productivity, through canal lining, laser leveling of fields, water informatics and related water smart irrigation and agriculture technologies.

Ÿ Promotion of water markets.

Ÿ Introduction of incentives for water saving at provincial, canal and farm levels.

Ÿ Regular monitoring of transboundary aquifers for quality and quantity and imposing penalties for non-conformance.

Ÿ Involving broad range of non-state actors and water sector government organizations for water governance.

Ÿ Skill development and capacity building of water experts to resolve technical issues and conflicts resolution.


15

4

4- Track-2 engages non-state actors, including civil society and groups of professionals to address international issue/s, where formal diplomatic efforts by states are not effective.

ReferencesBookhagen, B. and Burbank, D. W. 2010. Towards a complete Himalayan hydrological budget: Spatiotemporal distribution of snowmelt and rainfall and their impact on river discharge. Journal of Geophysical Research, 115:F0301.Brown, C. 2003. “New Directions in Binational Water Resource Management in the U.S.-Mexico Borderlands.” The Social Science Journal. 40(4):555-572.Gilmartin. D. 2015. Blood and Water: The Indus Basin in Modern History. University of California Press. Gulhati, N. D. 1973. Indus Water Treaty: An Exercise in International Mediation. Bombay: Allied Publishers. IBWC. 2006. International Boundary and Water Commission United States and Mexico. Immerzeel, W. W., Van Beek, L. P. H., Bierkens, M.F.P. 2010. Climate change will affect the Asian Water Towers. Science, 328: 1382-1385. DOI: 10.1126/science.1183188IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001. Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on C l imate Change, Cambr idge : Cambridge University Press. IWT. (1960). Indus Waters Treaty between the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan, signed at Karachi, on 19 September 1960 (entered into force 1 April 1960).Jacobs, Jeffrey W. 2002. "The Mekong River Commission: transboundary water resources planning and regional security." The Geography Journal, 168(4): 354–364.Jain, S., Goswami, A. and Saraf, A. 2009. Assessment of snowmelt runoff using remote sensing and effect of climate change on runoff. Water Resources Management, 24:1763–1777.Kamran, M.A. and G.P. Shivakoti. 2013. Comparative institutional analysis of customary rights and colonial law in spate irrigation systems of Pakistani, Punjab. Water International. 38(5): 601-619Krasner, S. D. 1983. International regimes. Cornell University Press. Kulkarni, A.V., Bahuguna, I. M., Rathore, B. P., Singh, S. K., Randhawa, S. S., Sood, R. K. and Dhar, S. 2007. Glacial retreat in Himalaya using Indian remote sensing satellite data. Current Science, 92 (1): 69-74. Lawrence, S. and Islam, S. 2012. Water diplomacy: Creating value and building trust in transboundary water negotiations. Science and Diplomacy, 1(3).Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective Action, Cambridge University Press.Mancosu, N., Snyder, R.L., Kyriakakis, G., and Donatella Spano, D. 2015. Water Scarcity and Future Challenges of Food Production. Water, 7(3), 975-992.N B I . 2 0 1 4 . N i l e B a s i n I n i t i a t i v e : C o r p o r a t e R e p o r t . http://nileis.nilebasin.org/system/files/Corporate%20Report%202014%20Final%20for%20web.pdfRasul, G.., Dahe, Q. and, Chaudhry, Q. Z, 2008. Global warming and melting glaciers along southern slopes of HKH Ranges. Pakistan Journal of Meteorology, 5(9) 63-76.Sadoff, C. W. and David, G. 2002. Beyond the river: The benefits of cooperation on international rivers. Water Policy, 4(5):389-404.

UNECE. 2009. Capacity for Water Cooperation in Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia: River Basin Commi s s i on s and O the r Institutions for Transboundary Water Cooperation. United Nations Economic Commission for Cooperation, New York and Geneva.


16

http://www.mdpi.com/search?authors=Noemi%20Mancosu

http://www.mdpi.com/search?authors=Richard%20L.%20Snyder

http://www.mdpi.com/search?authors=Gavriil%20Kyriakakis

http://www.mdpi.com/search?authors=Donatella%20Spano

http://www.mdpi.com/search?authors=Donatella%20Spano


Writeshop 2

Abstract

Pakistan is among the top abstractors of groundwater in the world. Groundwater is an important contributor to agricultural water requirements in Pakistan, accounting for 48 percent of water withdrawals for irrigation. Groundwater is primarily used for agriculture in Pakistan (94%), followed by domestic uses (6%) and negligible usage in the industrial sector. Currently there are 1.2 million tube wells in Pakistan, of which .08 million (67%) are located in Punjab. The country's increasing reliance on, and over abstraction of groundwater is threatening sustainability of this sensitive freshwater resource. The groundwater reservoir of Indus River Basin is experiencing rapid depletion, as the amount of water abstracted from the reservoir is not adequately recharged through natural or artificial means. An equally serious issue is that of degradation in groundwater quality, with increases in salinity driven by irrigation and abstraction, and contamination of groundwater from agriculture and industry.

The social and economic effects of declining water tables are not uniform in the Indus River Basin. These effects vary among upper and lower riparians, plain and coastal residents, and small and large farmers, and have the potential to be a source of access and equity issues. The groundwater economy in the Indus Basin of Pakistan is pervasive and anarchic, in part due to a lack of institutional and regulatory framework for managing this significant resource. This scenario threatens sustainability of the country's agriculture, industrial and growing urban use, and may lead to conflicts on the sharing of this important resource. This paper aims to review the context and extent of Pakistan's groundwater economy, the challenges it faces and the factors that threaten its sustainability.

20

© LEAD Pakistan

Groundwater as Significant Natural Resource

Competition over visible surface water resources is evident across the globe. In comparison, the invisible nature of groundwater and its subsurface location means that it often gets neglected, as far as policymaking is concerned. Hence, the legal and institutional structures for managing aquifers the world over are still in their infancy. The character of groundwater as a “classical common pool resource, is inherently vulnerable to the so-called 'tragedy of the commons' in which actual and potential stakeholders act solely in their own individual short-term self-interest, rather than taking into account long-term communal requirements”.

Globally, groundwater is playing an increasing role in domestic, industrial and agriculture water supply. Global abstraction of groundwater has been estimated to increase from 100-150 (km3) in 1950 to 950-1000 km3 in 2000, with majority of growth being in the agricultural sector, notably in Asia. About 43 percent of global irrigation, more than 50 percent of the world's drinking water supply and a large share of industrial activity depends on groundwater.

The use of groundwater has significantly improved food security around the world especially in Asia and Africa. However, intensive use of groundwater resulting in aquifer depletion and groundwater pollution means that the current trends cannot be sustained. A combination of supply-push and demand-pull factors is responsible for the pervasive use of groundwater. On the supply side, factors such as government subsidies on electricity in many countries, lack of regulatory framework for groundwater use, and availability of inexpensive pumps and drilling technologies have encouraged farmers to fulfill irrigation requirements using groundwater. In addition, demand side factors play a significant role in driving over-abstraction. Groundwater's capacity to provide flexible, on-demand irrigation to support agriculture, and the growing need to provide food for urban populations have led to over-abstraction.

Groundwater as a resource presents tremendous opportunity to fulfill the world's freshwater needs. However, it is now increasingly coming under stress. The decline in water tables poses threat to farmers' lives and livelihoods and adversely effects environment. Declining water tables impact water quality, stream flows, wetlands, and down gradient users negatively. An anticipated shift in precipitation patterns due to climate change is further expected to increase reliance on groundwater for irrigation – something that puts sustainability of this resource into question.

By its very nature, groundwater use entails more soc ioeconomic , inst i tut ional , legal and pol icy

considerations than surface water. Weak social and institutional capacity and the near absence of legal and policy frameworks regarding its use, seem to hamper the optimal development of groundwater resources in Pakistan. This problem is further exacerbated in a transboundary context between India and Pakistan, because of differing levels of knowledge, capacities and institutional framework of the two riparian states.

Groundwater resources are highly dependent upon land use. Changes in land use in the main aquifer recharge areas, exert direct influence on the rate and quality of recharge — and as such, groundwater governance cannot be addressed in isolation from consideration of the processes determining or controlling land use.

Groundwater use and availability has an important equity dimension in the context of small farmers and women. Groundwater, through the use of hand pumps, is often more accessible than surface water, especially to small farmers at the tail end of the canals. Moreover, groundwater through the use of hand pumps is more accessible to women to fulfill subsistence agriculture and domestic needs. Some researchers have found that women have little to say or do in managing canal irrigation. However, numerous studies in Africa, Asia, and Latin America show that “when women explore ways to improve their livelihood through smallholder agriculture or livestock, groundwater and small pumps are commonly involved”. Thus, the socioeconomic impacts of depleting groundwater tables and deteriorating quality will affect poor farmers and women, the most.

Groundwater Use, Equity and Sustainability in Pakistan Use and Over-abstractionPakistan is among top abstractors of groundwater in the world. As of 2010, Pakistan was ranked the fifth largest abstractor by the National Groundwater Association (USA), with estimated abstraction of 64.82 km per annum. Groundwater is primarily used for agriculture in Pakistan, with about 10 percent of the total groundwater exploitation used to meet domestic and industrial requirements. Currently there are 1.2 million tube wells in Pakistan, of which .08 million (67%) are located in Punjab, considered to be Pakistan's breadbasket. Groundwater is utilized in 50% of irrigation in Pakistan. National level data on groundwater abstraction for industrial and domestic use is scant, but the fast pace of urbanization and industrial developments that ensue, leads to increase in the demand for groundwater, and deterioration in its quality, as well. According to a 2009 study, Punjab met 90% of its domestic water demand through groundwater, while 4% of the population of Balochistan abstracted groundwater for domestic use.

21


5

6

7

8

9

10

113

12

8- IWMI, 2007. 9- IWMI, 2007. 10- IWMI, 2007. 11 - National Groundwater Association, 2015. 12- Sarwar and Sharma, 2009. 13- Groundwater Use in Agriculture and Irrigation, Asghar Hussain, Slide 6 (Leads Training Session 2). 14- IWMI Presentation, Dr. Arif Anwar, Slide 3 (Leads Training Session 2). 15 - Qureshi et. al. 2009.

13

14

15

Global Context

Pakistan's reliance on groundwater is threatening sustainability of this sensitive freshwater resource. The groundwater of the Indus River Basin receives its natural recharge from irrigation and link canals (45%), irrigation return flows from fields (26%), as well as rivers (6%) and precipitation. Artificially, groundwater can be recharged through flooding, recharge wells or percolation tanks. However, artificial recharge is not common in Pakistan. The groundwater reservoir of the Indus River Basin is experiencing rapid depletion, as the amount of water abstracted from the reservoir is not adequately recharged through natural or artificial means.

With decline in the water table, Pakistan's abstraction has progressed from dug wells to deeper bore wells and tube wells. Tube wells are expensive to install and operate. Their cost increases in direct proportion to decrease in the water table. To illustrate with an example, installation cost increases seven times and pumping cost increases three times, with decrease of six to 24 meters in the water table. Farmers and urban residents have continued groundwater pumping despite the costs, because there is limited access to surface water for agriculture or domestic use. Use of chemical fertilisers has also led to contamination of groundwater in rural areas, leading to health hazards.

The urban use of groundwater is plagued with over-abstraction and contamination. Construction of major cities over large areas of land, and often over groundwater recharge areas, with major parts carpeted and covered with concrete, hampers seepage of water through precipitation and other means, thus drastically lowering water table through regular over-abstraction and negligible recharge.

While many cities on the Indus River Basin rely on groundwater for drinking and domestic needs, most of the studies and surveys have concentrated on the two major urban centers; Lahore and Islamabad. Lahore primarily depends on groundwater to meet its drinking water needs. The public water supply in Lahore is cheap but intermittent, which compels residents, mostly wealthy, to install private tube wells to extract water. Consequently, it creates inequity in water access, while catastrophically lowering of the water table. Recent estimates suggest that Lahore's water table is 300-600 feet below the surface. Due to concentration of industries surrounding Lahore and discharge of untreated wastes into River Ravi, Lahore's groundwater is frequently contaminated and very difficult to decontaminate. In a study conducted in 2006, every sample from Lahore's groundwater was found to contain arsenic beyond permissible levels.

Islamabad is experiencing rapid reduction in groundwater levels. A 2014 report by UN Habitat estimates that Islamabad's water table is depleting by 1.7 meters, each year. Islamabad has a sizeable population of 1.7 million that

extracts water from tube wells lining the streams. The streams that once used to contain fresh water are now full of effluents from the domestic, industrial and hospital wastes. The abstraction of water from wells lining the streams is lowering the water table, and supplying unsafe drinking water to residents. Additionally, Islamabad's master plan does not contain any irrigation network. Consequently, the neighboring rural areas - that mostly engage in livestock and dairy farming - abstract water from the aquifer to meet their needs. Over-abstraction in Islamabad is due to domestic and agricultural uses of water.

Access and Equity IssuesThe social and economic effects of the declining water tables are not uniform in the Indus River Basin. These effects vary among upper and lower riparians, plain and coastal residents, and small and large farmers. The upper riparian of the Indus River basin - farmers in Northern Punjab, who have access to canal heads and the river - are relatively water secure. The water table in these areas is high, as water is sufficiently recharged through seepage from canals and rivers. However, downstream farmers face inequity. They receive less river and canal water, which also adversely affects recharge of their groundwater. Consequently, the cost of irrigation is 2.19 times higher in the tail end of the Indus River Basin, compared to the northern Indus River Basin. Depleting water table poses an additional challenge to farmers near the coastal areas, as seawater intrusion is rendering the land unsuitable for agriculture or drinking. There is also inequity within villages between small and large farmers. Wealthier farmers with large landholdings can afford installing tube well/s, whereas the small and poorer farmers cannot. As a result, poorer farmers buy water from wealthier farmers. While there are not many observations of rent seeking behavior, the wealthier farmers sell water after their need is met. This can be problematic in drought season. In short, depletion in groundwater has increased inequity between farmers.

Women are responsible for arranging water for domestic use, especially in rural areas of Pakistan. This is a herculean task, since most of the women, especially in rural areas travel long distances to procure water, for example in desert areas like Thar and Cholistan. However, fortunate communities have access to water from tube wells. Many of these even do not have the convenience to readily receive water from taps and hand pumps. These communities access water from springs, streams, and rivers, especially in hilly areas such as ponds in desert areas and rain harvesting. This takes a toll on their health and prevents from contributing to the economy in more productive ways. Unfortunately, their contributions often go unnoticed and unrewarded. Most government initiatives focus on landowners and farmers, in which rural women do not qualify. Women are often left out of the decision-making apparatus of water planning and


22

16

17

18

19

20

16- Michel et al. 2013. 17- IWMI, 2004. 18- Qureshi et. al. 2009. 19- Qureshi et. al. 2003. 20- Kugelman and Hathaway, 2006. 21- Kugelman and Hathaway, 2006. 22- UNHABITAT, 2014. Islamabad, Pakistan Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, Abridged Report, Cities and Climate Change Initiative. UN Habitat.23- UNHABITAT, 2014. Islamabad, Pakistan Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, Abridged Report, Cities and Climate Change Initiative. UN Habitat. 24- Social and Equity Angle of Groundwater, Dr. MUHAMMAD BASHARAT Slide 29. 25- Equity and Social Issues of Groundwater, Dr. Muhammad Basharat, Slide 27.26- Ahmad, S. 2007

21

22

23

23

24

25

26

management. Some recent initiatives have focused on women, as means of improving access to water. Results from case studies in Pakistan's Punjab region show that “women's participation in water sector programs significantly improved the community's access to clean drinking water, augmented school enrollment, and reduced rampant epidemics.” The gender dimension in groundwater abstraction creates an interesting policy dilemma. On one hand, the government may want to discourage over-abstraction of water from tube wells. On the other, inconvenience for rural women increases in the absence of tube wells. The solution to this problem lies in regulating groundwater abstraction for agriculture, so that the water table is recharged, and women can conveniently extract water from their home wells, rather than travelling long distances.

Hazards f rom Unsusta inable Use of Groundwater in Pakistan's Indus BasinIn Pakistan, unsustainable use of groundwater has generated potential hazards for the current and future use of the resource. First, in many areas in the Indus Basin, particularly those with high population densities, such as Punjab and Sindh, a combination of tube well irrigated agriculture and lack of availability and variability of surface water has resulted in groundwater overdraft. Declining water tables effect poor farmers more than the rich by making pumping more expensive. The cost of construction of a deep electric tube well (>20 meter) is US$ 5,000, as compared to US$ 1,000 for a shallow tube well (<6 meter). The present cost of pumping groundwater from a shallow tube well is US$ 4.2 per 1,000 m, as compared to US$ 12 per 1,000 m from a deep tube well.

Groundwater lends itself to the same challenges and opportunities for transboundary water sharing, as surface water –on inter-state and intra-state levels. In the case of Indus River Basin, where aquifer is unconfined, excessive abstraction of water on one side of the border can decrease water table on other side of the border. It can create water gradient, where water begins flowing to the region with lower water table. This has implications for water availability, quality and equity. For example, in the case of India and Pakistan, over abstraction of groundwater in the Indian Punjab is lowering water table in bordering regions of Pakistan. Depletion of groundwater forces Pakistani farmers to dig deeper wells, which are more costly. Additionally, water abstracted from greater depth is more saline and harmful for the soil. Therefore, Pakistani farmers are vulnerable to the adverse effects of groundwater abstraction in India, without having a share in the benefits of the water abstracted. Similar transboundary groundwater issues are faced within Pakistan on an interprovincial level, where over abstraction of groundwater in Punjab, the largest user of groundwater in the country, can decrease water tables in other provinces. Within districts, there is already growing contest between

agricultural, industrial and municipal users, over groundwater.

Climate change is compounding the stress of depleting groundwater resources. It is disrupting the natural hydrological process of groundwater recharge. The effect is more pronounced for Pakistan, because the Indus aquifer is porous and unconfined and is heavily dependent on surface water for recharge. Increasing variability of monsoon rains, the rapid melting of glaciers and prolonged droughts threaten the natural recharge of Indus aquifer. The variability of monsoons will not have a visible effect on surface water in the short term, but will have prominent effects in the long term. Flooding of Indus River Basin from rapid melting of glaciers is beneficial for groundwater recharge. However, melting of the glaciers will lead to prolonged droughts, consequently compelling farmers and residents to increase groundwater abstraction, further depleting the water table.

Institutional, Legal and Policy Conditions for Groundwater Governance in PakistanHistorically, groundwater in Pakistan has been managed indirectly, partly because of weak law enforcement, and partly because of the difficulty of establishing effective licensing systems for large number of players in an anarchic groundwater economy. Indirect management of groundwater has occurred primarily through manipulation of energy prices. Before introduction of the canal irrigation system, drainage needs in Pakistan's Indus Basin were minimal and water tables were deep. The aquifers were in a state of hydrological equilibrium, as recharge to the aquifer from the rivers and rainfall was balanced by outflow and crop transpiration. However, as more water was diverted by the introduction of the canal irrigation system, percolation to the aquifer increased in the irrigated areas and water tables rose to harmful levels, causing the twin problems of large-scale water logging and salinity. Thus, public programs directly encouraged pumping of groundwater, through subsidized electricity tariffs, diesel, as well as availability of institutional credit for farmers.

The Government of Pakistan installed 16,700 tube wells (supplying an area of 2.6 million hectares) under the Salinity Control and Reclamation Project (SCARP), to lower the groundwater table, to create favorable crop growth conditions and, also to reduce the risk of soil salinization. The initiation of SCARP tube wells, combined with public subsidy on electricity, as well as the introduction of locally made diesel engines in Pakistan, led to an explosive growth in the number of tube wells in the country to the tune of 0.8 million, out of which more than 90% are used for agriculture. Due to the obvious advantage of being available, as and when needed, groundwater use for irrigation quickly picked up, as opposed to surface water

23


3

27

3 28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

27-Water and Sanitation Program, World Bank, 2016. 28- Qureshi and Mohtadullah. 2014. 29- IUCN, 2010. 30- Leghari et. al. 2012. 31- Leghari et. al. 2012. 32- FAO Aquastat, 2015. 33- Bhutta and Smedema, 2005. 34- Briscoe and Qamar, 2005. 35- Qureshi et. al. 2009. 36 -Qureshi et al. 2009

36

with flows of the latter being unreliable, based on taking turns according to land parcel location along a canal, and flows being concentrated largely in the summer months. Thus, the SCARP Project initiated in 1960, actually initiated the large-scale extraction and use of groundwater for irrigated agriculture in the Indus Basin - a practice that continues unabated, unchecked and unmetered at disproportionate levels, today.

The institutional condition for groundwater management is largely amorphous in Pakistan. The country has had various drafts of the National Water Policy, but none have been implemented so far. Pakistan has no comprehensive water law defining rights to resources. Groundwater rights in the country are attached to land ownership rights and withdrawal rights are not regulated. Historically, the only point of contact between the government and ground water users in the region has been through the provision of electricity. The 1991 Water Accord defines rights to water among provinces, and the Canal and Drainage Act governs irrigation systems. Pakistan and India are signatories to the Indus Water Treaty, which governs the use of Indus River water in a trans boundary context. However, Indus Water treaty is essentially a surface water treaty, with no reference to trans boundary groundwater aquifers of the Indus. Thus, there is no legal or policy framework to deal with the issue of groundwater usage and its sharing at the intra and interstate levels.

Unmonitored conjunctive use of ground water, along with surface water is prevalent in Pakistan's Indus Basin. This is true even for head end farmers, who receive more canal water compared to tail end farmers. In fact, Hammond (1994) finds that head end farmers end up using more groundwater than tail end farmers, and that quality of groundwater declines at the tail end. This shows that patterns of asymmetry in access are etched out, due to inequality in access to surface water, and are reinforced further through quality of groundwater. Moreover, one of the key consequences of this inequitable access to groundwater has been a clear increase in salinity in tail end areas, as farmers at the tail end are more dependent on expensive groundwater pumping. There is lack of synchronization between provincial policies and energy subsidies related to groundwater use in Pakistan, exacerbated by political control, as well as little oversight from the government. Qureshi and Mohtadullah (2014) document an annual subsidy on agricultural tube wells to the tune of PKR. 8.5 billion (US$ 140 million). However, this subsidy benefits only 2.5% of the farmers, who own deep electric tube wells, clearly reinforcing asymmetries in access and use and feasibilities of using groundwater. In addition to reviewing electricity subsidies and their distribution, there is a need to revisit crop patterns, in favour of shifting away from high water intensive crops, like sugar cane and rice in the Punjab

province. Particularly, there should be alarm at the policy level for exporting high water intensive crops, as these are considered as 'virtual water' exports.

Cropped areas for different crops should be fixed on the basis of country's food requirements and availability of water resources. In areas, such as Cholistan desert, where groundwater resources are not yet tapped due to lack of resources of the local population, groundwater still presents the opportunity to secure livelihoods of the large population living in this region.

Services of irrigation engineers and agronomists are required for determination of crop water requirements, and improvement in water use efficiency, by introducing and promoting innovative and improved soil, crop and water management practices and technologies. A number of NGOs (service providers) are already working in agriculture, irrigation, water, and soil management areas (supplies of non-water inputs, installation of irrigation and water technologies and advisory services on irrigation and agriculture, etc.). So, these service providers could provide irrigation and agricultural services to enhance water use efficiency, thereby improved agricultural productivity. Management of groundwater in Pakistan did not receive much attention, until a decade earlier, because the resource was in abundance. Therefore, the focus remained primarily on its development. However, the situation began to turn serious, when such unregulated exploitation brought many aquifers under severe stress and threatened sustainability of this resource. Pakistan must learn that development of groundwater resources without proper planning and management strategy has paid back very badly. Therefore, Pakistan needs a serious debate about whether to pump its aquifers to maximum and face consequences thereafter, or be more proactive now, better manage abstraction and invest in recharge today.

Towards Sustainable Groundwater Use in Pakistan: Way Forward

There is a need for supply and demand side management interventions for sustainable use of groundwater in Pakistan. On the supply side, the basin needs active management of its aquifers to prevent overdraft. Some of the ways, this can be done is through construction of dams to store flood water for recharge, and use surface water and rain water harvesting for recharge. Rain water harvesting is particularly of interest, and has a lot of potential in the region. Domestic rain water harvesting is another powerful tool that needs to be mobilized. The infrastructure for this already exists, as Balochistan has the extraordinary karezes, which have served as an excellent source of community water supply and irrigation – however these are dying and becoming extinct and need to be revived.


24

37

38

39

40

37 - Theesfeld, 2008. 38 - Hammond (1994). 39- Qureshi and Mohtadullah, 2014. 40- Hoekstra and Hung, 2005 41 -Shah et. al. 2000.

41

Besides supply side measures, there is also a need to restrict groundwater demand. For instance in San Francisco, groundwater zones were created and a groundwater tax, varying across different zones, according to the cost of alternative supplies were successful in stabilizing water use levels. However, it must be realized that developed country solutions, such as this may not work in the developing world, considering the high population density, large number of farmers and fragmented land holdings.

Indirect demand management strategies, such as import of virtual water to limit groundwater demand, especially for water intensive crops, such as rice, are also direly needed. Since agriculture is the largest consumer of groundwater in Pakistan, water efficiency in the agriculture sector can significantly reduce groundwater depletion. Water efficiency can be improved by effective decisions regarding crop type, irrigation scheduling, irrigation method, soil enhancement measures and source of water. In crop selection, farmers can transition from water intensive rice and sugar cane to lentils, beans and many fruits that are water efficient. Irrigation supply can be regulated in terms of soil moisture content and the stage of crop maturity, as crops require less water in the early season planting stage, than at the mid- season stage. As for irrigation method, drip or sprinkler irrigation is 40-80% more water efficient that surface water irrigation or flood farming. To lower the dependence on ground and surface water for agriculture, rainwater harvesting and utilization of treated waste water are promising areas in agricultural water efficiency. Unfortunately, due to weak institutional structures, poor water storage capacity, misplaced incentives and lack of awareness, Pakistan has lagged in water efficiency in agriculture.

Institutional solutions for sustainable groundwater management typically hinge on enacting laws to regulate groundwater use and abuse. India and Pakistan have been toying with various drafts of national groundwater policies fo r decades, but a re fa r f rom enactment o r implementation. The institutional conditions for Pakistan's groundwater economy need to be bolstered at national and transboundary levels. In Pakistan, even though Indus Water Treaty (1960) and Indus Water Apportionment Accord (1991) address international and interprovincial water sharing, these do not address groundwater sharing. Fortunately, there are successful examples of groundwater sharing in other parts of the world, such as Genevese Aquifer sharing between France and Switzerland (1977) and Guarani Aquifer sharing between Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Argentina (2010). Benefit sharing is also possible in the case of groundwater. However, it requires extensive trust building between the parties. Options for benefits sharing include sharing of the cost of artificial recharge, tariff relaxation for the party with less abstraction of groundwater, or sharing economic gains of water intensive activities in proportion of water usage. Other creative options are also possible. In case of Pakistan and India, revision of Indus Water Treaty, or perhaps a separate treaty pertaining to groundwater may be necessary, to mitigate the issue of transboundary groundwater sharing. As for equitable sharing of groundwater between provinces, Pakistan will either need to add equitable groundwater sharing to the mandate of existing

institutions, such as WAPDA or Provincial Irrigation and Drainage Authorities, or create laws and regulations that define the limits of abstraction by urban centers, rural areas and individuals.

ReferencesHammond, D., 1994. Conjunctive use of canal and groundwater in Punjab, Pakistan: management and policy options. , pp.201–231.Hoekstra, a. Y. & Hung, P.Q., 2005. Globalisation of water resources: International virtual water flows in relation to crop trade. Global Environmental Change, 15(1), pp.45–56.UN-IGRAC, 2010. http://www.un-igrac.orgAQUASTAT FAO, 2015. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/basins/indus/index.stmBriscoe, J., and Qamar, U. 2005. Pakistan's water economy: running dry. World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA.Shah, T., Burke, J. and Villholth, K.G. (2007) Groundwater: A Global Assessment of Scale and Significance. In: Molden, D., Ed., Water for Food, Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture, International Water Management Institute, Londres: Earthscan, Colombo, 395-423.I W M I , 2 0 0 7 . R e t r i e v e d f r o m : http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/assessment/Water%20for%20Food%20Water%20for%20Life/Chapters/Chapter%2010%20Groundwater.pdfNational Groundwater Association, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.ngwa.org/Fundamentals/use/Documents/global-groundwater-use-fact-sheet.pdfWater Partnership Program, World Bank, 2012. Managing the Invisible- Understanding and Improving Groundwater Governance (Draft Report). R e t r i e v e d f r o m : http://www.groundwatergovernance.org/fileadmin/user_upload/groundwatergovernance/docs/Thematic_papers/GWG_Thematic_Paper_11.pdfQureshi et. al. 2009. Challenges and Propsects of Sustainable Groundwater Management in the Indus Basin, Pakistan. Water Resource Management.. Retrived from: http://cpwfbfp.pbworks.com/f/Sutainable+GW+Mgt_Indus_Pak.pdfGroundwater Use in Agriculture and Irrigation, Asghar Hussain, Slide 6 (Leads Training Session 2)IWMI Presentation, Dr. Arif Anwar, Slide 3 (Leads Training Session 2)Michel et al. 2013. Connecting the Drops: An Indus Basin Roadmap for Cross Border Water Research, Data Sharing and Policy Coordination. Stimson Center, Washington DC.Kugelman, M. and Hathaway, R. 2006. Pakistan's Water Crisis: Running on Empty. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/ASIA_090422_Running%20on%20Empty_web.pdfBhutta, M.N. and L. K Smedema 2005. Drainage and salinity management. Country Water Resources Assistance Strategy Background Paper # 15 March,

25


42

43

44

42- Shah et. al. 2000. 43- Arab Forum for Environment and Development, 2010. 44- Arab Forum for Environment and Development, 2010.

http://www.un-igrac.org

http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/basins/indus/index.stm

http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/assessment/Water%20for%20Food%20Water%20for%20Life/Chapters/Chapter%2010%20Groundwater.pdf

http://www.ngwa.org/Fundamentals/use/Documents/global-groundwater-use-fact-sheet.pdf


http://www.groundwatergovernance.org/fileadmin/user_upload/groundwatergovernance/docs/Thematic_papers/GWG_Thematic_Paper_11.pdf

http://cpwfbfp.pbworks.com/f/Sutainable+GW+Mgt_Indus_Pak.pdf

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/ASIA_090422_Running%20on%20Empty_web.pdf

2005Ahmad et al. 2004.Drought mitigation in Pakistan: Current status and options for future strategies. IWMI.UNHABITAT, 2014. Islamabad, Pakistan Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, Abridged Report, Cities and Climate Change Initiative. UN Habitat.Ahmad, S. 2007. Land and Water Resources of Pakistan- A Critical Assessment. The Pakistan Development Review. No. 46 : 4 Part II (Winter 2007) pp. 911–937. Retrieved from: http://pide.org.pk/pdr/index.php/pdr/article/viewFile/2276/2249 Qureshi, A. and Mohtadullah, K. 2014. Managing groundwater pumping and quality for sustainable irrigated agriculture : a perspective from Pakistan. IUCN, 2013. Beyond Indus Water Treaty. Water Cooperation for Managing Groundwater Environments- Policy Issues and Options. Pp 7. Karachi, Pakistan:IUCN. Retrieved from: http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/ulr___water_coopertaion_for_managing_groundwater_environments.pdfTheesfeld, I. 2008. A Review on National Groundwater Policy Instruments – Grasping Institutional Aspects for Transboundary Groundwater Governance. Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Association for the Study of the Commons (IASC) Conference. Cheltenham, England. Retrieved from: http://iasc2008.glos.ac.uk/conference%20papers/papers/T/Theesfeld_155301.pdfU S A I D . 2 0 1 0 . U S A I D C o u n t r y P r o fi l e : P r o p e r t y R i g h t s a n d R e s o u r c e G o v e r n a n ce P a k i s t a n . R e t r i e v e d f r o m : http://usaidlandtenure.net/sites/default/files/country-profiles/full-reports/USAID_Land_Tenure_Pakistan_Profile_0.pdfLeghari et. al. 2012. The Indus basin in the framework of current and future water resources management. Hydrolology and Earth System Sciences, 16, 1063–1083, 2012 Shah et. al. 2000. The global groundwater situation: overview of Opportunities and Challenges . Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute.A r a b F o r u m f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a n d D e v e l o p m e n t , 2 0 1 0 . W a t e r E f fi c i e n c y H a n d b o o k . R e t r i e v e d f r o m : http://www.afedonline.org/water%20efficiency%20manual/PDF/6Chapter%205_Agriculture.pdf Page 73Foster S . e t a l . 2009 . Groundwater Governance : Conceptua l f ramework fo r assessment of p rov i s ions and needs . http://aquadoc.typepad.com/files/gw-mate-so-1-groundwater-governance-oct-2009.pdf Page 3. UN-IGRAC, 2010. http://www.un-igrac.orgShah, T., Burke, J. and Villholth, K.G. (2007) Groundwater: A Global Assessment of Scale and Significance. In: Molden, D., Ed., Water for Food, Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture, International Water Management Institute, Londres: Earthscan, Colombo, 395-423.I W M I , 2 0 0 7 . R e t r i e v e d f r o m : http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/assessment/Water%20for%20Food%20Water%20for%20Life/Chapters/Chapter%2010%20Groundwater.pdfNational Groundwater Association, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.ngwa.org/Fundamentals/use/Documents/global-groundwater-use-fact-sheet.pdfWater Partnership Program, World Bank, 2012. Managing the Invisible- Understanding and Improving Groundwater Governance (Draft Report). R e t r i e v e d f r o m : http://www.groundwatergovernance.org/fileadmin/user_upload/groundwatergovernance/docs/Thematic_papers/GWG_Thematic_Paper_11.pdfQureshi et. al. 2009. Challenges and Prospects of Sustainable Groundwater Management in the Indus Basin, Pakistan. Water Resource Management.. Retrieved from: http://cpwfbfp.pbworks.com/f/Sutainable+GW+Mgt_Indus_Pak.pdfGroundwater Use in Agriculture and Irrigation, Asghar Hussain, Slide 6 (Leads Training Session 2)Qureshi, A. S; Shah, T.; Akhtar, M. 2003. The groundwater economy of Pakistan. Working Paper 64. Lahore, Pakistan: International Water Management Institute. Retrieved from: http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/WOR64.pdfIWMI Presentation, Dr. Arif Anwar, Slide 3 (Leads Training Session 2)Michel et al. 2013. Connecting the Drops: An Indus Basin Roadmap for Cross Border Water Research, Data Sharing and Policy Coordination. Stimson Center, Washington DC.Kugelman, M. and Hathaway, R. 2006. Pakistan's Water Crisis: Running on Empty. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/ASIA_090422_Running%20on%20Empty_web.pdfAhmad et al. 2004.Drought mitigation in Pakistan: Current status and options for future strategies. IWMI.UNHABITAT, 2014. Islamabad, Pakistan Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, Abridged Report, Cities and Climate Change Initiative. UN Habitat.Ahmad, S. 2007. Land and Water Resources of Pakistan- A Critical Assessment. The Pakistan Development Review. No. 46 : 4 Part II (Winter 2007) pp. 911–937. Retrieved from: http://pide.org.pk/pdr/index.php/pdr/article/viewFile/2276/2249

Water and Sanitation Program, World Bank, 2016. Retrieved from: http://www.wsp.org/FeaturesEvents/Features/recognizing-women-driving-force-rural-water-sector

Qureshi, A. and Mohtadullah, K. 2014. Managing groundwater pumping and quality for sustainable irrigated agriculture : a perspective from Pakistan. IUCN, 2013. Beyond Indus Water Treaty. Water Cooperation for Managing Groundwater Environments- Policy Issues and Options. Pp 7. K a r a c h i , P a k i s t a n : I U C N . R e t r i e v e d f r o m : http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/ulr___water_coopertaion_for_managing_groundwater_environments.pdf Theesfeld, I. 2008. A Review on National Groundwater Policy Instruments – Grasping Institutional Aspects for Transboundary Groundwater Governance. Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Association for the Study of the Commons (IASC) Conference. Cheltenham, England. Retrieved from: http://iasc2008.glos.ac.uk/conference%20papers/papers/T/Theesfeld_155301.pdf USAID. 2010. USAID Count ry Profi le : P roper ty R ights and Resource Governance Pak is tan . Ret r ieved f rom: http://usaidlandtenure.net/sites/default/files/country-profiles/full-reports/USAID_Land_Tenure_Pakistan_Profile_0.pdf Leghari et. al. 2012. The Indus basin in the framework of current and future water resources management. Hydrolology and Earth System Sciences, 16, 1063–1083, 2012 Shah et. al. 2000. The global groundwater situation: overview of Opportunities and Challenges. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute. A r a b Fo r u m f o r E n v i r o n m e n t a n d D eve l o p m e n t , 2 0 1 0 . Wa t e r E f fi c i e n c y H a n d b o o k . R e t r i e ve d f r o m : http://www.afedonline.org/water%20efficiency%20manual/PDF/6Chapter%205_Agriculture.pdf Page 73


26

http://pide.org.pk/pdr/index.php/pdr/article/viewFile/2276/2249

http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/ulr___water_coopertaion_for_managing_groundwater_environments.pdf

http://iasc2008.glos.ac.uk/conference%20papers/papers/T/Theesfeld_155301.pdf

http://usaidlandtenure.net/sites/default/files/country-profiles/full-reports/USAID_Land_Tenure_Pakistan_Profile_0.pdf

http://www.afedonline.org/water%20efficiency%20manual/PDF/6Chapter%205_Agriculture.pdf

http://aquadoc.typepad.com/files/gw-mate-so-1-groundwater-governance-oct-2009.pdf



http://www.groundwatergovernance.org/fileadmin/user_upload/groundwatergovernance/docs/Thematic_papers/GWG_Thematic_Paper_11.pdf

http://cpwfbfp.pbworks.com/f/Sutainable+GW+Mgt_Indus_Pak.pdf

http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/WOR64.pdf

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/ASIA_090422_Running%20on%20Empty_web.pdf

http://pide.org.pk/pdr/index.php/pdr/article/viewFile/2276/2249

http://www.wsp.org/FeaturesEvents/Features/recognizing-women-driving-force-rural-water-sector

http://www.wsp.org/FeaturesEvents/Features/recognizing-women-driving-force-rural-water-sector

http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/ulr___water_coopertaion_for_managing_groundwater_environments.pdf

http://iasc2008.glos.ac.uk/conference%20papers/papers/T/Theesfeld_155301.pdf

http://usaidlandtenure.net/sites/default/files/country-profiles/full-reports/USAID_Land_Tenure_Pakistan_Profile_0.pdf

http://www.afedonline.org/water%20efficiency%20manual/PDF/6Chapter%205_Agriculture.pdf

Hydro Disasters

Writeshop 3

Abstract

Extreme meteorological and hydrological events (floods, droughts and windstorms) transform water into core hydro disaster source. Under the climate change scenario, South-Asian countries would be facing more variability and increased frequency of extreme events. Various physical evidences, like temperature rise, sea level rise and sea water intrusion, have shifted creeping hydro disasters in Pakistan to the category of frontline disasters. Various organizations in Pakistan manage disasters in different phases (pre disaster, during disaster and post disaster). However, there are many missing links in overall disaster management, especially in case of hydro disasters. With increasing population and declining natural resources, effective management of hydro disasters has become a prerequisite for achieving sustainable socio-economic growth in Pakistan. This paper provides insight on institutional response and overall system empowerment needs for hydro disaster management, through review of existing roles and responsibilities of various institutions in Pakistan. Certain factors that are essential in managing disasters have been discussed to identify shortcomings and gaps in the existing management of hazards and disasters. This paper discusses specific recommendations to cope with creeping hazards, such as sea intrusion.

30

© Fliker - Online

Introduction“I still remember, the fresh sweet water of the river used to flow here and we could fetch an ewer full of it for our daily use. We were enjoying a fulfilling life at that time. We had abundant livestock and enough milk, curd and butter to meet our needs.” Eyes of fifty year old Sakina were radiating the story of happy bygone days. “Everything has become a tale. Little is left now, except tears everywhere, as in our eyes”. She heaved a cold sigh, as she continued to tell the irony of present times.

This affliction is not of Sakina only. All 166 residents of the village face the unending calamity of sea water intrusion every day. Siddique Dablu is a 37 household village of the Hajamru Creek in the Keti Bander taulka of Thatta district. A WWF report states that residents of the village belong to the Dablu caste and comprise 53 men, 56 women and 57 children. Life in this coastal village is a misery, 365 days a year.

Human developments along water bodies are also exposed to various water related disasters. Factors like population growth, limited resources and availability of low cost houses along water bodies have contributed to the increasing exposure and vulnerability of populations to hydro disasters. The climatic influence on hydrological extremes and variability is a new dimension in discussion.

The severe environmental impacts caused by reduction in the flow of River Indus and the damage done to the coastal districts due to sea intrusion are commonly known facts. The sea has engulfed thousands of acres of fertile land in Thatta and Badin districts. The fertile lands where crops used to grow have now turned barren and arid. The brackish sea water has even salinized the groundwater, making it unusable. This sea intrusion has adversely damaged the unique coastal and delta ecosystem.

Sea water intrusion is among various hazards, which may trigger disaster, if not dealt with seriously. A hazard is a situation that poses a level of threat to life, health, property, or environment. As regards disaster, according to United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR): “A disaster is a serious disruption of the functioning of a society or community, that causes widespread human, material or environmental loss, which exceeds the capacity of the affected society to cope without external intervention”. Natural disasters are classified on the basis of their core source, for example, wind related, earth related and water related. Storms, cyclones, hurricanes, tornadoes, and tidal waves are classified as wind related disasters. Whereas, earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides, avalanches and volcanic eruption are categorized as earth related disasters. Heatwave is another form of natural disaster due to climatic extremes that occur when the combination of heat and humidity causes air to become oppressive. However, hydro disasters like floods,

droughts and cloud bursts are the most common and damaging natural disasters.

Water borne disasters are the cause of overall 70 % economic loss of all disasters across the world, since 1992. Extreme meteorological and hydrological events (floods, droughts and windstorms) transform water into core hydro disaster source. As per information from Siddique village's elders, this village was once socially and economically connected with coastal areas. However, sea water intrusion and rising sea levels have broken this connection, resulting in the isolation of this village from nearby population clusters and facilities relating to health, education, food and drinking water.

This paper provides insight on the institutional response and overall system empowerment needs for hydro disaster management, through review of existing roles and responsibilities of various institutions in Pakistan. Siddique Dablo village affected mainly due to sea water intrusion spanning over decades is a typical case of a creeping hazard. This paper discusses specific recommendations to cope with such creeping hazards.

Ins t i tu t iona l Response and Sys tem EmpowermentHyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015, is a general working plan for reduction in losses attributed to disasters. The 186 countries across the globe accepted and adopted the action plan in 2005 at Kobe, Hyogo, Japan. This framework aims to achieve the goal, through collaborative actions to substantially reduce impacts of disasters on economic, social and environmental structure of participating countries.

West Pakistan National Calamities (Prevention and Relief) Act 1958 and Civil Defense Act 1952 were the first key legal instruments for organizing and coordinating the relief oriented model in Pakistan. It followed conventional disaster response approach, comprising sporadic relief activities and disaggregated response till 2005.

The devastating 2005 earthquake, and 2010 and 2011 floods in Pakistan are prominent and unique in sense, that these disasters identified weaknesses in system capacity, overall planning and response and triggered evolvement of new institutions. The October 2005 earthquake exposed inadequacies of the existing disaster and emergency management apparatus in Pakistan. The earthquake response highlighted the critical need for, and importance of a national platform to manage and coordinate response efforts and to holistically work on disaster risk reduction. National Disaster Management Ordinance (NDMO) was promulgated in 2006, to address the existing shortcomings, in compliance with the international commitments spelt in the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) 2000 and Hyogo Framework for Action

31

Hydro Disasters

45

46

47

48

49

45- Taluka is the second layer of this system. Above them are the districts/zilla and below them are the panchayats/villages. 46- Extreme means far from the bulk, at the border, or not common.47- https://www.osha.gov/dte/grant_materials/fy10/sh-20854-10/hazard_id_facilitatorguide.pdf. 48- Climate change and extreme heat events”, Department of Health and Human Services, USA. 49- Water and Disaster Risk, A contribution by the United Nations to the consultation leading to the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR), July 2014

Organization Roles and Responsibilities

Provincial Irrigation

Departments (PIDs)

Operation and maintenance of barrages. Planning, design, construction and

maintenance of irrigation facilities and system. Operation and maintenance of

river training works. Flow and water level data observation and communication.

Preparation and implementation of the flood fighting plans.

Water and Power

Development

Authority (WAPDA)

Operation and maintenance of reservoirs, including Mangla, and Tarbela dams

and Chashma barrage. Observation and communication of flow, water level and

rainfall.

Pak Army

Rescue and relief activities during events of hazards and

disasters, including

earthquake and floods.

Pakistan Commission

for Indus Waters

(PCIW)

Receives hydrological data of Eastern rivers from India and sends it to Flood

Forecasting Division (FFD) for issuance of forecast.

Emergency Relief Cell

(ERC)

Coordinates with local and international donor agencies for aid. Management of

stocks related to primary needs in case of emergencies.

Federal Flood

Commission (FFC)

Planning and implementation of national flood protection plans, through PIDs

and federal line agencies.

National Highway

Authority (NHA)/

Pakistan Railways

Flood protection measures and flood fighting plans for all bridges crossing main

rivers.

Flood Forecasting

Division (FFD) of

Pakistan

Meteorological

Department (PMD)

Primarily responsible for dissemination of forecasts and warnings related to

weather. Operates and maintains network of weather stations for sharing and

analysis of weather data.

Pakistan Space and

Upper Atmosphere

Research Commission

(SUPARCO)

Analyses

and sends

real-time flood inundations, land-use details, and vegetation

growth,

through satellite data. Pre and post event spatial comparisons to

facilitate relief, monitoring and developments in hazard areas.

2005-2015. Subsequently, the Parliament enacted National Disaster Management (NDM) Act in 2010, which provides national disaster framework.

Increasing levels of exposure and vulnerability, as highlighted in 2010 floods, require multi-sectoral and targeted efforts at each tier, from federal government entities to local level management. With this essence, high

priority must be tagged for activities related to monitoring and coordination of disaster risk reduction.

The government institutions, including National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), Provincial Disaster Management Authority (PDMA), District Disaster Management Authority (DDMA) the Pak Army, Water and


32

50

50- Vulnerability is the degree to which a population, individual or organization is unable to anticipate, cope with, resist and recover from the impacts of disasters (Environmental Health in Emergencies and Disasters, a practical guide, B. Wisner, J. Adams, WHO, 2002)

Power Development Authority (WAPDA), Pakistan Commissioner for Indus Waters (PCIW), Emergency Relief Cell (ERC) of the Cabinet Division, Provincial Irrigation Departments (PIDs), Pakistan Railways (PR), Federal Flood Commission (FFC), Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO), National Highway Authority (NHA) and Flood Forecasting Division (FFD) of Pakistan Meteorological Department (PMD) are directly involved in flood management activities and associated hydro hazards. These organizations also perform a direct or indirect role in other hydro disasters, like droughts, cyclones, cloud burst etc. The roles and responsibilities of each organization are specified in the table given on previous page.

Impacts of global warming and climate change are evident in the form of progressive sea water intrusion, along coasts in Pakistan, aforementioned as creeping hazard disasters. Lack of fresh water along deltas and sea level rise are the major factors contributing to sea water intrusion. Existing disaster management organizations are silent over steps taken, or being considered to cope with such disasters. No comprehensive policy, plan and infrastructure exists in Pakistan to handle such hazards.

Pakistan has developed its National Disaster Risk Management Framework (NDRMF). The framework comprises National and Provincial Management Commissions responsible for policy making and plan approvals in context of disaster management. National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) is executive arm of the NDMC, responsible for coordination and management of Disaster Risk Management (DRM) activities at the national level. Disaster management plans are implemented at provincial and district tiers. National Disaster Management Act 2010 (NDM Act), the guiding principles of National DRR Policy, and National Disaster Management Plan (NDMP) were formulated in June 2012.

The NDMP is a long-term, holistic policy document for Disaster Risk Management (DRM) at national level. It encompasses all aspects of disaster management policy, strategies and actions, including:

æNational hazards and vulnerability assessment.

æHuman resource development.

æCommunity-based disaster risk management.

æMulti-hazard early warning system.

æDisaster management operation by type of disaster, such as earthquake, tsunami, flood, drought, cyclone, etc.

æActions/programs for disaster management.

Analysis of disaster management at federal, provincial and district levels indicates missing links between hazard assessment, preparedness and response among agencies and communities affected at grass root level. Although, policy level clarity exists at the federal and provincial levels, yet we lag behind in action and implementations at district, taluka, Union Council (UC) and village levels. It is mainly attributed to lack of integration between response agencies and non-engagement of grass root communities and civil society organizations.

A number of departments are working on disaster response, relief and management. However, these stakeholders are unable to respond in integrated manner, due to communication, coordination and capacity gaps. In terms of capacity to respond to any natural hazard, Pakistan Army is the only institution, which may deploy its resources in the shortest possible time. Though, response is responsibility of civil agencies.

We still have capacity to cope with potential hydro hazards, despite limited funds, if we can control following factors:

æ Lack of political will and commitment.

æCorruption in systems.

æ Lack of training and capacity building of implementing agencies at grass roots (District, taluka, UC and village levels).

æ Inadequate resource allocations for DRR/DRM efforts.

æ Inability of response agencies and government to mainstream climate change and DRR/DRM in annual development plans and mid-term/strategic plans.

æReluctance of government response agencies to involve civil society organizations, including NGOs and community in DRR/DRM planning and implementation at grass roots level.

æ Lack of coordination and integration between DRR/DRM response agencies results in delayed responses, ultimately resulting in increased losses.

Management of Hydro Disasters and Building ResiliencePakistan is among the most disaster susceptible countries in the world. These disasters can be sub-divided into natural and human induced types. Pakistan experienced large scale natural disasters, including devastating 2005 earthquake and 2010 flood in recent years. Disaster management, including disaster risk reduction and response to disasters is being managed at the national and provincial tiers, in Pakistan.

33

Hydro Disasters

51

51- National Disaster Management Plan, Main Volume, Ministry of Climate Change, National Disaster management Authority, August 2012.

Unfortunately, lack of planning and preparedness severely hampered Pakistan's response to the catastrophic 2005 earthquake and the 2010 flood. The situation could somehow be tackled after support from donors worldwide, and philanthropists from within country, after significant irreversible loss of life and assets. It was decided after earthquake that National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) will be strengthened as an institution. NDMA was assigned to develop and implement an effective disaster response mechanism. However, the 2010 flood exposed poor planning and response of the authorities. It highlighted the pressing need for preparedness to cope with disasters to minimize the loss of life, property and assets through effective disaster response. The quantum of repercussions was heavy enough to bear after 2010 flood. This particular disaster reiterated the need for an efficient disaster management plan.

The lack of a proactive approach, insufficient resources and duplication of efforts among organizations handling disasters are the major factors contributing to the failure of effective disaster management in Pakistan. Preparedness of the government institutions assigned with the responsibility of managing disasters in before, during and after phases of disasters is critically important in minimizing losses.

According to United Nations, disaster is altogether a solemn failure of the operation of a community, as a result of general human, physical, socio-environmental losses, which surpasses capacity of the affected community or society to manage by the help of its own assets. Management of hydro disasters requires a complete understanding of the phenomena, through monitoring of hydro-meteorological parameters.

Typical hydro disaster management consists of structural and non-structural means as shown below. Structural

means include physical interventions, like the revision of building codes for safe buildings during floods and thunder storms, engineering solutions to safely address water hazards, based on an understanding of physical phenomena and scientific principles. Non-structural means have a broad spectrum in hydro disaster management and directly contribute to pre and post disaster situations. These include comprehensive risk assessments, early warning systems, systematic and coordinated emergency response and ecologically friendly land use planning to minimize effects on flora and fauna.

Resilience, as defined by United Nations is the ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards, to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions. Building of resilience among communities in Pakistan has not been focused at the required level. This important factor is usually ignored during planning and policy development.

Local governance can effectively build resilience in hazard prone communities. It has the capacity to manage local response and relief efforts, engage communities in decision making, disseminate warnings, ensure long-term livelihood security (through micro financing and insurance), establish public private partnerships by managing tourism, small local resorts, cultural festivals, and provide sustainable health and education facilities.

Hazards, when not assessed and mitigated systematically, can lead to disasters. Various factors which contribute to the transformation of hazards into disasters are as follows:

æUneven population density.

æUnplanned development.

æPoverty.

æPressure on natural resources.

æNatural hazards.

æ Sea intrusion.

æ Soil erosion.

æMigration.

æDeforestation.

æ Loss of habitat.

HYDRO DISASTER MANAGEMENT

STRUCTURAL MEANS

REVISION OF BUILDING CODES

ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS ETC.

NON STRUCTURAL MEANS

RISK ASSESMENT

EMERGENCY RESPONSE

LAND USE PLANNING

EARLY WARNING SYSTEMS


34

52

52- http://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/terminology

Strategies to curb transformation of hazards into disasters

æControl uneven population growth and density.

æ Implementation of appropriate building codes and ensuring planned developments.

æPoverty alleviation, through education and capacity building.

æAgro-economics to control pressure on natural resources.

æPreparedness for managing natural hazards and turning these into opportunities.

æRelease of minimum flow downstream of Kotri to avoid sea intrusion.

æ Forestation and preservation of mangroves for soil stabilization and checking sea intrusion and floods.

æ Improvement of literacy rate to reduce migration.

æ Efforts to promote conservation of forests, forestation and check deforestation.

æ Environmental study to control sea aquatics and ecosystem.

æ Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger in the communities by improving infrastructure, increasing resilience, protecting livelihood, and introducing risk insurance mechanism.

æPromote gender equality and women's empowerment by gender mainstreaming in DRM planning, capacity building, and providing equal opportunities for women.

æ Improvement of environmental sustainability through climate change adaptation for DRM.

æBioengineering solutions for reducing risks (Forestation and alternate renewable energy solutions, like solar energy).

æDevelop global partnership for development by sharing knowledge and best practices, through international linkages and bilateral and multilateral MoUs.

æ Integrated water resource management at national, international and provincial levels for effective disaster management response.

æ Local community shall be involved for inclusion of real time, ground level problems and solutions in the policies.

Way ForwardThe following recommendations can help improve institutional response capacity on DRM/DRR:

æComprehensive assessment of water related hazards (hydro hazards), which frequently transform into disasters, is of utmost need. Without assessment, management of hydro disasters would be limited only to response. Multi-hazard risk assessment exercise should be carried out by involving all stakehloders.

æResponse in hydro disaster management is of key importance. All efforts towards disaster management are focused on response only. We need to understand that response is an integral part of overall disaster management, which comprises management and response in pre, during and after phases. Response also means the understanding of and responding to pre disaster perspective and needs. Thus, response after a disaster and responding to different phases of disaster are equally important.

æHazards associated with sea water intrusion should be made part of hazard assessments along coastal areas. Engineering solutions shall be provided in consultation with and involvement and participation of community in climate change perspective. It would ensure community ownership and provide real time information related to sea water intrusion and its impacts.

æRole of grass roots level organizations needs to be enhanced for greater and better impact of emergency response and DRR efforts. These may be given more responsibilities in local level DRR plans, based on their geographic presence.

æ Strengthening of the district disaster management authorities (DDMA) is the best solution to optimally cope with hydro hazards. These authorities perform pivotal role in development and timely implementation of effective DRR plans at district level, and should be given more importance and resources by defining clear roles and responsibilities.

æCommunication, coordination and capacity of departments working for disaster response, relief and management shall be improved by imparting trainings on ongoing basis, and by providing and utilizing latest technology and skills related to early warning systems (EWS), evacuation, and building resilient infrastructure. In this regard, it is needed to enhance capacity of civil agencies through resource allocation and capacity building, to respond to hazards and disasters.

æCapacity of local district level implementers need to be developed through trainings, to respond to hazards and disaster. Approach shall be that no one should wait for

35

Hydro Disasters

instructions in case of disaster, and should directly act on DRR/DRM roles mentioned in local level implementation plans, with support of communities and other civil society organizations, which can contribute to resilience building.

æ These plans need to be developed in consultation with all stakeholders, including Disaster Management Center (DMC), NDMA , PDMA , DDMA , Federa l F lood Commissioner (FFC), SUPARCO, PMD, WAPDA, Pakistan Commissioner for Indus Water (PCIW), Pakistan Army, Provincial Irrigation Department (PID), Emergency Relief

Cell (ERC), Provincial Flood relief Departments, Police, Pakistan Forest department, Pakistan Railways (PR), Federal and Provincial Information Departments (F/PID), district administrations, civi l society organizations (CSOs), NGOs, community based organizations, and representatives of vulnerable communities.

ReferencesReferences1. http://www.pec.org.pk/lecture_DRR.aspx accessed on June 3, 21052. National Disaster Risk Reduction Policy, Ministry of climate change, Government of Pakistan, 2012,3. Training Manual on Hydro-Climatic Disasters in Water Resources Management, 20094. Building Resilience to Natural Disasters and Major Economic Cries, ESCAP, United Nations, April 2013.5. National Disaster Management Plan, Main Volume, Ministry of Climate Change, National Disaster management Authority, August 2012.6. Water and Disaster Risk, A contribution by the United Nations to the consultation leading to the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR), July 2014.


36

http://www.pec.org.pk/lecture_DRR.aspx%20acessed%20on%20June%203

Hydro-diplomacy Between Pakistan and Afghanistan

Writeshop 4

Abstract

Pakistan and Afghanistan share nine small and large rivers. The 700 kilometre long Kabul River, being the largest, originates in the Sanglakh Range of the Hindu Kush Mountains in Afghanistan, and merges with the Indus River near Attock, Pakistan. In the Kabul basin, inflows from Afghanistan to Pakistan are estimated at 17.5 Million Acre-Feet (MAF) in the Kabul basin, while outflows from Pakistan are about 8.0 (MAF). Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan provinces utilize waters of the Kabul River, which is impounded by several dams. The paper narrates existing and impending hydro challenges faced by the two neighboring countries. The discussion encompasses the demand and supply side aspects. The key challenges on the demand side include inefficient use of water by both parties, challenges of urbanization and development projects for irrigation and hydropower needs. Climate change impacts and the resulting effects on hydrology are among the critical challenges being faced on the supply side. Afghanistan is currently utilizing 1.8 MAF of water. The future water use in Afghanistan is estimated at 3.6 MAF. The prospective additional utilization of 1.8 MAF of water by Afghanistan and critical importance of the hydro needs for both countries makes it imperative to amicably negotiate mutually acceptable sharing of water resources.

40

© Development Lense

Principles of Hydro-diplomacy and Lessons for Afghanistan and Pakistan

Executive SummaryThis paper discusses principles of hydro-diplomacy and lessons for Afghanistan and Pakistan, after elaborating existing and impending hydro challenges faced by the two neighboring countries. Traditionally, in a global setting, settling of issues has generally resulted in water sharing/apportionment agreements (essentially need based). Such approaches have often resulted in zero sum game, relegating importance to the benefits of water, which could be harnessed through 'benefit sharing' approach, instead of 'water sharing'. On the flip side, an absence of these principles in the diplomatic process creates difficulty for the states to shift from the zero sum mindset to integrated approach in hydro diplomacy.

Using benefit sharing as a premise, the discussion delves into the need to understand and apply a mix of international water negotiation frameworks/principles, which have successfully been used in other international basins with similar circumstances. It includes an analysis of the following five water negotiation frameworks: (1) Water Diplomacy Framework, which focuses on interests; (2) Water Security Framework, which focuses on risks; (3) Four Worlds of Water Conflict Transformation/4R Framework that focuses on identity; (4) 4i Framework; and, (5) the Hybrid Hydro-Trifecta Framework.

History of water sharing issues shows that powerful parties try to have control over water for their needs. They may exercise power derived from their status of being upper riparian or by using military or any other means. The settlement of issues has generally resulted in some sort of water sharing/apportionment agreement (essentially need based). Such approaches have often resulted in zero sum game, relegating little importance to the benefits of water, which could be harnessed through benefit sharing approach, instead of water sharing approach. On the flip side, an absence of these principles in the diplomatic process creates difficulty for the states to shift from the zero sum mindset to integrated approach on hydro diplomacy.

Building on the findings of the negotiation frameworks and approaches to resolution of water issues, the authors propose a list of principles that can be applied to the concept of hydro-diplomacy between Pakistan and Afghanistan. These include trust building and effective use of scientific and technical knowledge, socio-economic and legal factors, benefit sharinginvolving water fraternity and all stakeholders, and a competently facilitated/mediated meeting, leading to productive dialogue and collaboration. In terms of the lessons learnt, the paper establishes that even acute differences over water can be addressed, water conflicts can be resolved and the archest enemies can negotiate water-sharing agreements.

The paper establishes in the context of Pakistan and Afghanistan, that water differences between the two riparian states can best be addressed through i) trust building and ii) mutual cooperation that acknowledges equitable sharing of benefits among all stakeholders. It proposes four key confidence building measures as starting points, including a) creating favorable conditions for dialogue and continuous interaction, b) sharing human and institutional capacities, c) encouraging joint ventures and d) establishing joint commission for Water cooporation.

In the last section of the paper, the authors propose a two-phased approach for Pakistan to strategically roll out the proposed confidence building measures. In phase I (immediate run), authors propose establishing a dedicated cell, established by the Government of Pakistan, to coordinate existing literature on hydro-diplomacy, developed by various stakeholders in pockets. The cell should take the responsibility of initiating diplomatic dialogue with Afghanistan, based on evidence and well thought out and research based policy papers. In phase II (medium term), building upon success of diplomatic efforts in phase I, the two countries should identify or establish dedicated institutions responsible for taking institutional ownership of Afghanistan-Pakistan hydro-diplomacy, to ensure sustainability. In the last phase (long run), authors propose establishing a joint commission for management of shared waters on Kabul River.

This paper aims to provide road map to the policy stakeholders and civil society representatives to push forward the need to establish sustainable, evidence driven, well-grounded and mutually beneficial agenda for Af-Pak water diplomacy.

IntroductionPakistan and Afghanistan do not only share geographical boundaries. Historical, cultural, religious, and ethno-linguistic connections, trade and other ties exist between the countries' people and governments. There are no agreements between Pakistan and Afghanistan, governing rights to the water of the Kabul River, a tributary of the Indus River in Pakistan, which flows between the two

41


53

54

53- The notion of benefit sharing focuses on sharing benefits, rather than sharing water intra-state. Water should not be looked at as a commodity to be divided. r Rather, an approach should be developed, which equitably allocates not only the water resource, but the benefits derived from it. Benefit sharing allows riparians to focus firstly on generating basin�wide benefits, and secondly on sharing of rewards on fair, effective and sustainable basis. Forms of benefit sharing will be situation specific but could involve monetary transfers, granting of rights to use water, financing and ownership of investments, or the provision of non�related goods and services. 54- Contesting Hidden Waters: Conflict Resolution for Groundwater and Aquifers by W. Todd Jarvis, 2014

countries. Afghanistan is a landlocked, arid to semiarid mountainous country, affected by droughts and climate change. Afghanistan's plans for irrigation, fishing and hydro-power (on river Kabul) could eventually trigger tension, especially considering the decades-long, still unresolved, border dispute between the two countries (Renner 2009, pp. 6-7). Polarization of Pakistan and Afghanistan during Afghan war, and post-afghan war scenario, especially with reference to the ongoing ethno-religious conflicts in Afghanistan, after withdrawal of Soviet Union, and occasional blames of cross-border infiltration by militants, by both countries, further emphasize the need to timely address the issue.

The Kabul River Basin encompasses around 12 per cent of Afghanistan's territory and supports over seven million of its people. It accounts for about 26 percent of Afghanistan's total annual river flow. (Aziz 2007, p. 1).

Water Resources and Challenges with Respect to Kabul River WatersFactors, such as population increase, and rural-urban migration from other parts of Afghanistan to Kabul, in search of security and improved livelihoods, are expected to contribute to further increase water demand in the Kabul City and Kabul River basin. Irrigation and hydro-power projects on Kabul River, in conjunction with ongoing climate change impacts will further affect water flow into Pakistan, thus adversely affecting economy and livelihoods, by impacting sectors, like agriculture. Increase in temperature, attributed to climate change is expected to gradually melt the Hindu Kush and Himalayan glaciers, at an increasing pace. This melting will increase water availability, initially. However, net water flow from glaciers into Indus River Basin will gradually decrease over time, through increased glacial melt, thus affecting livelihoods and economy. Already, a water deficit country, 'Pakistan, having the world's largest contiguous irrigation system, which doubled in size between Pakistan's independence in 1947 and 2005', is expected to face permanent reductions in water supplies, thus shifting from its status of water-short to water-scarce country, by 2016 (Aziz 2007, pp. 6-8).

There is no water sharing agreement between Afghanistan and Pakistan on the Kabul River. Neither, exists any agreement on financing and efficient management of this important resource and its flow control infrastructure. Gradual increase in the water use of River Kabul, has been the uniform tendency of Pakistan's water use, since last few decades, and recently of Afghanistan, as well. Planned water projects on Kabul River, by the upper riparian Afghanistan, will adversely affect the lower riparian Pakistan. It is critically important to arrive at consensus solutions by understanding issues, maintaining historical rights and arriving at benefit-sharing options for both countries, through the use of Kabul River water. This can help avert prospective hydroconflicts over competition for

shared resources in absence of mutually agreed allocation system, and can harness development, through integrated approach, resources and management.

A treaty over water rights to the Kabul River can help address important issues, such as sharing of river flow data by Afghanistan. Though, unfortunately, the 2003 initiative by Pakistan's Federal Flood Commissioner, for reaching a water treaty with Afghanistan, could not somehow succeed. This failure may be attributed to the history of conflict, and absence of cooperation on water between the countries.

Changing monsoon patterns are projected to decrease precipitation over the region of the Kabul River Basin by up to 20 per cent (Renner 2009, p. 8). In Afghanistan and Pakistan, severe droughts are usually caused by low winter precipitation for two consecutive years, which occurs at least once every 10-15 years. During the last cycle of drought, however, the glaciers decreased in size, which poses additional, longer–term, threats to the water sector (GIRoA 2008, p. 8).

Urbanization: The estimated population growth in Afghanistan from 2000 to 2010 was about 37 %, much greater than the high population growth rate of about 26 % for other least developed countries for that same period. The city of Kabul is primarily situated in the Central Kabul sub basin. But continued growth has caused the city to expand into the Paghman-Upper Kabul and Logar sub basins. The Paghman-Upper Kabul, Central Kabul, Deh Sabz, and Logar sub basins make up the southern part of the Kabul Basin. Population growth and recent droughts have placed new stresses on the city's limited water resources and have caused many wells to become contaminated, dry, or inoperable in recent years. The population of Kabul City increased at a rate of about four percent per year during 2002–07. High population growth rates in the Kabul Basin are expected to continue; on the basis of United Nations population projections, the population of the Kabul Basin could more than double to nine million by 2057.

Afghanistan has an immediate and growing need for water to meet the demands of the Kabul Basin's rapidly increasing population. Increased withdrawals and future climate change may adversely affect existing water supplies. Although, existing water supplies in some parts of the basin are adequate for current needs, the quality of that water has deteriorated as a result of human activities. Improvement in sanitation and well construction/lining may improve quality of drinking water in many parts of the basin.

Need and Principles Of Hydro DiplomacyThe foregoing multifaceted challenges, including population growth, urbanization, climatic variability and change, have are resulted/ing in increased water scarcity


42

55

56

55 - United Nations 2011). 56- Rashid Fahkri, Afghanistan Central Statistics Office, written comm., 2007)

and degradation in water quality in Afghanistan and Pakistan. These challenges have particularly made Afghanistan, susceptible to droughts and floods. Pakistan has, in the recent past, witnessed sharp decline in annual flows at Attock, while Afghanistan is unilaterally planning to construct dams, along Kabul River. Such unilateral water developments by Afghanistan will further reduce flow of Kabul River at Attock, thereby negatively impacting flow of Indus River, which gets approximately 20% of its flow from Kabul River. This potential diversion by Afghanistan in the Kabul basin would particularly, negatively affect Pakistan, during the Rabi (crops sown during October to December) and early Kharif (crops sown during summers) cropping seasons, as Pakistan already faces water shortages in Rabi season and at the start of Kharif season. There will, therefore, be serious repercussions for Pakistan's irrigation system, incomes and livelihoods. Reiterating, there is no institutionalized framework of cooperation or water agreement between the two countries, over Kabul River.

These Pak-Afghan emerging issues in the wake of the challenges discussed above, and the limited resources available to address these, make it critical to avoid conflict over shared water with Afghanistan. Hydro-diplomacy cannot only help resolve existing conflicts, but can also prevent future conflicts. There have been no recent official dialogues between Afghanistan and Pakistan on emerging water situation, and issues are likely to blow up in near future. People of the two countries are likely to pay the price of this neglect. It is well advised to address the issues in their embryonic stages. Pak-Afghan track II water diplomacy, to date, has not been very successful in developing a consensus road map, and attracting attention of key players in the two countries. A recent study, based on interviews of leading Afghanistan and Pakistan policy makers, reveals that while Pakistani policy makers feel, there is scope to forge agreement over Kabul River with Afghanistan, most senior Afghan decision makers lack trust in their Pakistani counterparts, and are skeptical about any legal arrangement over Kabul River with Pakistan. There is, therefore, a dire need to learn from and apply lessons of International water negotiation frameworks/principles, with suitable adaptation to Pak-Afghan region.

Water Negotiations Frameworks and Approaches to Managing Water Disputes: International Water Law Framework sets out certain principles, derived from International Conventions/Treaties, including the Helsinki Rules on the Uses of the Waters of International Rivers, 1966 and the Convention on the Law of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, 1997, and International Customary Law, applicable to international transboundary shared water. The key principles of International Water Law Framework include: (1) Principle of equitable and reasonable utilization; (2) Obligation not to cause significant harm; (3) Principles of notification, consultation and negotiation; (4) Principles of cooperation and

information exchange; and, (5) Peaceful settlement of disputes. In addition to these International Water Law principles, there are various negotiation frameworks for international transboundary waters, including: (1) Water Diplomacy Framework, which focuses on interests; (2) Water Security Framework, which focuses on risks; (3) Four Worlds of Water Conflict Transformation/4R Framework, which focuses on identity; (4) 4i Framework; and, (5) Hybrid Hydro-Trifecta Framework.

Unlike conventional theory, Water Diplomacy Framework emphasizes on the flexible uses of water and joint fact finding to create value, rather than zero‐sum thinking,

through loops of societal, political and natural networks. Zero-sum approach is the “tendency to view negotiation as purely distributive; what one side wins, the other side loses.” However, negotiation is “rarely a zero-sum game. Rather, it is a process of collaboration and relationship building in areas of mutual interest.” Similarly, while in the conventional theory, water is considered a fixed resource and “water systems are bounded by their natural components”, the Water Diplomacy Framework recognizes the concept of “virtual” water and proposes water systems to be “made up of societal and natural elements that cross boundaries”. While traditionally, decisions made are expert-driven, the Water Diplomacy Framework requires involvement of all stakeholders in every decision, and professional facilitation of the process of collaborative problem solving. In this regard, it focuses on “mutual gains approach” for hydro diplomatic negotiation process, and emphasizes the need for mediation, as informal problem-solving; mediation is an assisted and facilitated negotiation, carried out by a third party. The bilateral approach is traditionally the starting point. Whereas, third party intervention through a facilitator is used, when parties reach an impasse. Mediated facilitation is the most appropriate method for hydro diplomatic negotiation process, in case of power asymmetry and mistrust between parties.

Water Security Framework focuses on investment and risks (risks associated with floods, droughts, pollution and terrorism). It utilizes a web of climate, energy, food, water, and community to define what might be tolerable for water use and reuse, without getting into “trouble”. Water security is “availability of acceptable quantity and quality of water for health, livelihood, ecosystems and production, coupled with acceptable level of water related risks to people, environments and economies.” The questions that are addressed in the Water Security Framework focus on, inter alia, the fundamental questions associated with hydro politics (who gets what, when, where and why).

4Rs Framework was developed by Dore and others (2010), based on the World Commission on Dams' concepts of “rights and risks”, and they added “responsibilities and rewards” in their negotiations analysis. This framework

43


57

58

59

60

61

62

57- Attitudes to Water in South Asia, Chatham House Report, 2014. 58- http://webworld.unesco.org/water/wwap/pccp/cd/pdf/educational_tools/course_modules/reference_documents/internationalregionconventions/helsinkirules.pdf. 59- http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_3_1997.pdf 60- Contesting Hidden Waters: Conflict Resolution for Groundwater and Aquifers by W. Todd Jarvis, 2014. 61- Contesting Hidden Waters: Conflict Resolution for Groundwater and Aquifers by W. Todd Jarvis, 2014. 62- (Robert H. Mnookin, Scott R. Peppet and Andrew S. Tulumello, Beyond Winning [Belknap Press, 2004], 168). 63- Water Diplomacy: A Negotiated Approach to Managing Complex Water Networks by Shafiq ul Islam and Lawrence E. Susskind. 64- (Goldberg at al., 1992). 65- Contesting Hidden Waters: Conflict Resolution for Groundwater and Aquifers by W. Todd Jarvis, 2014 66- Grey and Sadoff 2006. 67- Contesting Hidden Waters: Conflict Resolution for Groundwater and Aquifers by W. Todd Jarvis, 2014

64

63

65

66

67

differentiates between rights, needs, benefits, and equity and focuses on (a) possible rewards for different options; and, sharing of rewards on fair, effective and sustainable basis; (b) risks, which extend beyond financial sector and include voluntary and involuntary risk: who bears the risk; sharing of risks and reducing involuntary risks; (c) rights, including the human right to water or a water‐related

service; and, responsibilities: Dore and others (2009) argue that all stakeholders in water responsibilities to use the extracted water efficiently.

4i Framework, a modification of 4Rs Framework, developed by Jarvis and Wolf (2010), focuses on understanding issues, underlying interests, fair and equitable distributions of benefits, ways to craft sustainable and resilient institutions, and ways to use existing institutions and their compensation.

Hybrid Hydro‐Trifecta Framework orients and guides

direction of negotiations, using the abovementioned three water negotiation frameworks (water security, 4R/water conflict transformation and water diplomacy). It stresses that the questions that must be addressed in water negotiations, include: “what exists”, incorporating fields of study, such as geology and economics; “what we are capable of doing”, that focus on the fields of engineering and commerce, “what we want to do” through planning, law and policy, and “what we must do” based on values, ethics and philosophy. It further encourages data collection, targeted skills to “level” the playing field in negotiations and build competencies through collaborative learning.

The five water negotiation frameworks, discussed above, set out various elements of hydro diplomacy that are useful in hydro diplomatic negotiation process:

(1) , through various means, remains the Trust Buildingmost important and decisive component in the success of non-zero sum negotiations. “Trust is especially important in the process of collecting data and creating knowledge, when parties are generating creative options aimed at increasing value.”

(2) is another critical principle applicable to Cooperationhydro diplomatic process, particularly where there is power asymmetry and mistrust among parties. Power asymmetry can prevent equitable distribution of water resources in a transboundary water setting. However, more cooperative, bilateral relationship lessens likelihood of conflict, despite power asymmetry and mistrust. A “fair” distribution of benefits and costs is central to achieving sustained cooperation. Mediated negotiation can be, particularly, useful in case of asymmetric power and lack of trust between the parties.

(3) can enhance Use of scientific and technical knowledgebilateral cooperation. It plays an important part in mutual

gains/integrative approach, provided it is not used to “justify arbitrary (political) decisions”, but, instead, to “formulate creative trades collaboratively”.

(4) Similarly, in field and joint fact finding joint water commissions assist parties in earning trust of each other, and can significantly contribute in confidence building during hydro diplomatic negotiation process.

(5) is central to mutual gains/integrated Benefit sharingapproach to hydro diplomacy. In respect of international rivers, the notion of benefit sharing focuses on sharing benefits, rather than sharing water intra-state. Water should not be looked at “as commodity to be divided”, rather an approach should be developed, which equitably allocates the water resource, and benefits derived from it. Benefit sharing allows riparians to focus firstly on generating basin‐wide benefits, and secondly on sharing of

rewards on fair, effective and sustainable basis.

(6) encourage building The international water frameworkstrust and involving water fraternity and all stakeholders. Water issues are best resolved, when all stakeholders, including experts in various related fields, politicians, engineers, lawyers, sociologists and economists work together. These further stress on building and enhancing relationship and showing flexibility, through collaborative approach and joint gain solutions.

(7) The frameworks also, importantly, focus on ways to craft sustainable and resilient institutions, strengthening of institutions involved in transboundary water resource management and capacity building of institutions, which have a vital role to play in hydro diplomatic process.

(8) also leads A competently facilitated/mediated meetingto productive dialogue and collaboration. Facilitators help parties in better understanding the issues, underlying interests, fair and equitable distributions of benefits, and can be particularly useful in “feelings conversations” and “difficult conversations”.

Principles for Effective Negotiation for Transboundary Waters: Negotiation or mediation, through neutral facilitator(s), performs an important role in resolving transboundary water differences or disputes. Planning and preparation is the key for successful negotiation, to avoid irreparable damage to relationships and breakdown of future negotiations with the parties involved. At the preparation stage, an evaluation of one's “Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement” (“BATNA”) is also critical, to establish the threshold at which the party will reject an offer. In negotiation, BATNA refers to the “best outcome a party can expect, if it fails to reach agreement at the bargaining table with its counterpart”. A party should not agree to a deal that is worse than its BATNA.


44

69

68

70

71

72

68- Contesting Hidden Waters: Conflict Resolution for Groundwater and Aquifers by W. Todd Jarvis, 2014. 69- Contesting Hidden Waters: Conflict Resolution for Groundwater and Aquifers by W. Todd Jarvis, 2014. 70- (Max‐Neef, 2005). 71- Contesting Hidden Waters: Conflict Resolution for Groundwater and Aquifers by W. Todd

Jarvis, 2014. 72- http://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/conflict-resolution/water-diplomacy-the-role-of-science-in-water-diplomacy/

In addition to preparation and building relationships, there are four principles of effective negotiation: (1) Separating people from the problem; (2) Concentrating on interests, not positions; (3) Developing options that benefit both sides; and, (4) Insisting on using some objective criteria. These principles are reflected in the following “circle of value”:

Effective communication and building and enhancing relationships are vital for successful negotiations. Interests are the core needs, desires, fears, aspirations, and concerns etc. of each party that underlie and motivate their positions, demands and contentions. Options are possible outcomes of the negotiation. “Imagination” expands the range of possible options, promotes better solutions and creates value. Inquiry and sharing of information are key tools. Legitimacy is the use of objective standards and criteria, such as market data, principles and laws to convey a sense of fairness. If parties agree to conclude an agreement, these must clarify commitments. If parties decide otherwise, it is important to understand each party's walk-away alternatives or BATNA.

Lessons Learnt through Application or Non- Application of Principles of Negotiation and Hydro-Diplomacy: The key to successful hydro diplomacy is to examine the benefits in a basin from an integrative perspective. Riparian states must not presume transboundary water to be fixed amount of water to divide among themselves, which generally leads to a zero-sum mindset. Instead, water must be understood as flexible resource. The hydro-diplomacy processes must focus on various principles of hydro-diplomacy, including benefit sharing, building trust and joint scientific and technical fact finding. This allows creation of value and leads to positively addressing concerns of the states, regarding their water needs and national interests.

Analysis of various agreements related to international river basins indicates that even acute water differences can

be addressed, water conflicts can be resolved and archest enemies can negotiate water sharing agreements, by applying a mix of international water negotiations frameworks and principles of hydro-diplomacy. The Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace, 1994 is a classic example of how applying principles of hydro-diplomacy, discussed above, can create value and facilitate problem solving. The various hydro-diplomacy principles applied by Israel and Jordan, which led to building confidence and arriving at sustainable solutions acceptable to both parties, included collaborative generation of scientific and technical information, joint fact finding and monitoring joint work in the field, measuring stream flows and planning projects. Building relationships, based on flexibility, collaborative approach and joint gain solutions, arrived at by involving non state actors in implementation, and most importantly, building and enhancing trust through, among other, constituting joint water committee, jointly collecting data and creating knowledge and undertaking scientific analysis together, decisively helped in developing consensus and subsequent signing of the peace treaty. Similarly, principles of benefit sharing and cooperation can be seen in the various river commissions, where benefits of rivers are being used for national development and transboundary cooperation, including Mekong River Commission and Joint River Commission between USA and Mexico.

Absence of these principles in the diplomatic process, on the other hand, creates difficulty for the states to shift from the zero sum mindset to integrative approach of hydro-diplomacy. Mahakali Treaty, 1996 between India and Nepal, is an excellent example of how failure to use hydro-diplomacy principles in a treaty, including cooperation in backdrop of power asymmetry between the countries, and failure to use facilitated negotiation, leads to non-implementation of the treaty and breakdown of relationships. Similarly, lack of trust, failure to carry out joint fact finding and sharing of data, inadequate preparation etc. are some of the hurdles in negotiations between India and Pakistan over Indus Water Treaty, 1960 and between prov inces wi th in Pak is tan , wi th reference to Apportionment Accord, 1991.

Application Of Hydro-diplomacy Between Afghanistan and PakistanAforementioned challenges, including increasing water stress in Afghanistan, water scarcity in Pakistan, impending effects of environment, climate change and irrigation projects in the two countries, makes it incumbent upon the two riparian states to address their water differences at earliest. A review of the international water negotiation frameworks and their experience in various international basins shows that applying a mix of the said frameworks and principles can help avert potential water disputes between the two countries. Considering power asymmetry and lack of trust between Pakistan and Afghanistan, the 45


73

74

75

76

77

73- FAO, 2005 adapted from Fisher and Ury, 1991. 74- https://web.archive.org/web/20070630203151/http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace%20Process/Guide%20to%20the%20Peace%20Process/Israel-Jordan%20Peace%20Treaty 75- http://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/bi-17432.pdf. 76- (Kugelman et al, 2011)77- (Margaret et al, 2014)

water issues between the two riparian states can be best addressed through i) trust building and b) mutual cooperation that acknowledges equitable sharing of benefits among all stakeholders on both sides, within the constraints of political differences. This requires intelligent diplomacy. Building trust is a prerequisite for cooperation. Building of trust takes time. However, its results can be precisely meaningful. Once some degree of trust is established, it could convert limited cohesiveness to improved cohesiveness, thus bonding two adversaries in firm relations. As already mentioned, trust is especially important in the process of collecting data and creating knowledge, when parties are generating creative options aimed at increasing value. Initiatives, such as cooperation, collaboration, communication, joint fact finding, information sharing, negotiation and mediation by neutral party, and sincere efforts for mutual benefit sharing can result in building trust between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Such actions can enable both countries to discuss water related concerns, needs, and mutual benefits and prospective collaboration in this regard, despite differences. This can help in transitioning to a suitable treaty. Pakistan and Afghanistan need to engage in a number of measures in parallel, to fortify synergy and pre-empt emerging tensions.

Exploring Possible Avenues of Mutual Cooperation: Different areas of common interest and benefit may be explored. Once areas of mutual interest are determined, the parties can be brought together, and cooperation on more sensitive issues can be gradually achieved, over time. Mutual benefit sharing on equitable basis can be an important potential source of cooperation and collaboration. Water cooperation between Pakistan and Afghanistan, if intelligently promoted, has good chances of success. These measures can prelude a joint commission, which may be established in due course of time.

A four pronged approach can be adopted for confidence building measures on both sides, including:

(1) Establishing favorable conditions for dialogue and continuous interaction: For reasons already discussed, Afghanistan and Pakistan live in mutual mistrust. According to recent surveys, citizens of both countries have expressed increasingly negative views about each other. More Afghans have positive perceptions about India than Pakistan. Likewise, perception and the state stance of Pakistan, is not positive in case of Afghanistan, especially in response to recent issue of cross border infiltration of militants from Afghanistan. Building of mutual trust is the key to success. A number of confidence building measures can be taken up front, such as positive political statements, propagation of the potential information regarding mutual benefit sharing of water resources etc. and envisioned development. Interaction between professionals from Pakistan and Afghanistan, especially affiliated with the

institutions governing water and water resources, and delegated with the authority of decision making regarding these, including liaison between government to government, traders, water users, and farmers, needs to be sustained. To begin with, frequent seminars, workshops and meetings should be arranged on matters of mutual interests, such as watershed management, enterprise development, drinking water, climate change, efficient use of water, enhancing productivity, and prospects related to mutual benefit sharing of water resources etc. The strategy section of this paper delves into specifics of how this could be best done.

(2) Pakistan Sharing of human and institutional capacities: and Afghanistan should proactively extend their expertise, and should collaborate for developing human and institutional capacities. Some areas of interest can be data collection and sharing, including data related to the benefits of cooperation on transboundary water resources, Kabul River in this case. Such cooperation can be in areas such as , technical assistance for expanding water resource for cultivation, collaborative management of small dams, water supply for agriculture, especially horticulture, and efficient water management.

(3) Pakistan's universities can Encourage Joint ventures:offer research projects and culture exchange programs for Afghan students and encourage faculty members to interact regularly. The two countries should also initiate projects, such as establishment of research institutions for efficient water use and exploring possibilities of mutual benefit sharing. Similarly, a number of joint studies can be commenced on environment , conservation, and watershed management, effects of climate change and mitigation measures and enhancing agricultural product iv i ty, through effic ient water resource management . Joint study of Kabul River basin, groundwater recharge and water demand and supply options in future, mitigation of climate change effects and flood control can be undertaken. Similarly, joint data collection and sharing, and sharing of meta-data, especially hydro-metrological data, can be the steps forward. Pakistan should extend its resources and support, wherein it has more capacity and vice versa.

(4) The two countries can establish a joint, multi-disciplinary, scientific fact-finding and data sharing working group to develop understanding regarding hydrology of the Kabul River and build hydrological knowledge base on the Kabul River basin. Subsequently, setting up bilateral Af--Pak water resources commission to negotiate development plans for hydro power and agriculture, can be a major milestone. Both countries can negotiate a bilateral treaty on use and management of the Kabul River's water resources for their mutual benefit. It is quite ascertained to create a fund, keeping the pointed out options in forefront. Pakistan might address these kinds of concerns by simply


46

78

79

78 - (The Thirdpole, 2014). 79- (IUCN, 2013)

committing to education, trainings, enhancing response to the issues related to water, and making efforts to create confidence and mechanism for resolution of conflicts.

(5) It is necessary to establish a fund to support aforementioned options of mutual collaboration. Pakistan, can take initiative by investing in training, expanding efforts to build trust, and improving water-related crisis response and conflict resolution mechanisms.

Prioritized financing in water diplomacy and management is essential for survival and development. Considering the impending dangers to water availability, nothing can be more important than financial and political investment, which hydro-diplomacy calls for.

Strategy and Action Plan To Execute Hydro-Diplomacy Between Afghanistan and Pakistan - Way ForwardIn order to execute the four-pronged approach highlighted in the earlier section, Pakistan and Afghanistan need to be strategic, to ensure that plans are implemented in actionable and result oriented manner. To do so, it is useful to keep in mind that both countries are operating in conditions, where negotiations are likely to be politically loaded.

Keeping political context in mind, it would be naïve to expect that ebbs and tides of political hostility would not impact water diplomacy efforts between the two countries. In order to address political sensitivities, authors encourage the decision makers to consider three underlying points, while crafting a strategy: a) proactive identification of potential stumbling blocs, b) careful selection of confidence building measures to address anticipated impediments and c) consider sensitivity of time to execute initiatives and avoid provocative statements. The proposed strategy emphasizes the need for joint measures, and on taking both sides together for fruitful results. The strategy addresses short, medium and long-term suggestions to provide an impetus for a roadmap to execution.

Phase I – Immediate run: The first and the foremost step for Pakistan is to be proactive in discussions around water. The authors of this paper propose the use of diplomatic channels, initiated by the Foreign Office in Pakistan, as a much needed immediate step. This should be supported by a dedicated cell, established by the Government of Pakistan, to coordinate existing literature on hydro-diplomacy, already consulted by stakeholders in pockets. Given that the cell should be established immediately, the mandate should be clearly limited to existing resources. A better well-resourced set up may bridge identified research gaps, in the medium run. The dedicated cell could be housed by the government in the most appropriate location. The location shall not be subsequently changed,

unless in case of dire need to do so in unavoidable circumstances. In case of its relationship with Afghanistan, Afghanistan-Pakistan cell experienced shifting over to the three government departments. Such situations should be avoided to ensure smooth functioning.

Using findings of the literature review, the Foreign Office (FO) is recommended to initiate dialogue/discussion with Afghanistan, not directly on transboundary issues, but first around efficient agricultural practices for improvement in water management . Whereas, Foreign Office is strategically positioned and best suited to analyze findings of the literature and formulate its own strategy of engagement, a few suggestions from the authors include:

(1) Using findings of the literature review, Foreign Office should prioritize development of multiple focused briefs on various agriculture/water issues. These briefs should be developed on the basis of existing literature, which is ample for initial planning and strategy formulation.

(2) On the basis of the briefs, Foreign Service Academy to develop training courses around Af-Pak water management discourse, and offer these to the diplomats being posted in Afghanistan.

(3) Pakistan to organize low-key events on agriculture techniques with sponsored participation for Afghan delegates. It would be appropriate to utilise existing structures/organizations, already researching on water, rather than waiting to establish new structures. However, Foreign Office should provide funds to sponsor the events.

(4) Pakistan should mainstream discussion around efficient agricultural practices in all forms of engagement with Afghanistan, including culture, music, literature, media and track II exchanges.

(5) Pakistan to initiate and sponsor regular exchanges for water delegates from Afghanistan. Regular exchange of expertise, through forums and dialogues housed in each other's countries, will inform delegates regarding the issues related to water management and need for effective water management through coordinated efforts. Such

47


80

81- (Pakistan Water Partnership, 2015). 82- These potentially include perceived threats on unilateral construction of storage works, disagreements on existing/future uses, impact of water works on cropping seasons in Afghanistan/Pakistan etc.

81

82

exchanges will deliver knowledge regarding gleaning maximum benefits of water through efficient use, and socio-economic impacts. Informed coordination through capacity building will facilitate in transitioning to joint management of shared waters.

(6) Being the more exper ienced neighbor in water/agriculture issues, Pakistan should also sponsor fellowships to students and water experts to Afghanistan, as part of support provision on these issues. These fellowships could potentially sponsor studies at the various agriculture/arid universities, in Pakistan.

(7) Advise politicians, media, leaders and opinion makers to avoid provocative, uninformed and baseless statements, especially on media and other forums.

Phase II: After achieving preliminary success through diplomatic channels, both countries should identify, at the earliest, institutional ownership of Pak-Afghan hydro-diplomacy. This can only be attained through identification and establishment of structured institutional setups on both sides. These institutions, should be mandated to ensure sustainable dialogue between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

These proposed institutions should be permanent in nature

and be made operationally sound. These should have systems in place to develop and retain knowledge, possess sound skill base and strong management systems. These should also be mandated and empowered (both financially and in terms of decision making ability) to identify and acquire the skill sets required to ensure effective water management. The dedicated institution in Pakistan should build on the work done by the temporary cell established in Phase I, and not reinvent the wheel. Pakistan has learnt the importance of this, through its experience on water

management with India. Synergies of this experience shall be capitalized, while working with Afghanistan.

The identified government leads in both countries should aim to do the following:

(1) between the two Focus on dialogue and discussionscountries on transboundary issues, rather than agricultural practices and water management best practices, using 'benefit sharing' as the foundation of this initiative.

(2) Discussions between the two countries to emphasize, acknowledge and share information on in-country water management: Pre-empting a potential impediment in successful discussions over transboundary waters, Pakistan and Afghanistan should acknowledge the importance of effective in-country water management, and appraise each other of development plans in this regard. A major factor contributing to the water conflicts between two nations is the argument that the riparians are not doing enough in-house for effective water management, and are over relying on water flows from the bordering countries. This is likely to come up between Pakistan and Afghanistan, as well. As a proactive diplomatic measure, whenever the two parties meet, it would be useful to also highlight steps being taken in-house for effective water management, to show their responsibility towards the basin, overall. This includes steps being taken to improve irrigation practices, river pollution handling and watershed management.

(3) required to manage shared waters Identify the skillseffectively. The team of experts on the panels of these institutions, hereafter called 'water diplomats' should aim to acquire the comprehensive skill sets that are required to fully understand the multifaceted issue of water diplomacy, including forecasting, modeling (2,3,4D), engineering, economic analysis, legal and diplomatic skills. Global lessons learnt from basin management also suggest that ensuring both parties have the capacity to do this, creates enabling conditions.

(4) funded by the two Conduct joint research projectsgovernments (could be facilitated by a third party in the form of technical support). This concept should be contextualized to the two countries, through scientific research. One of the first joint research projects should aim to calculate the nuts of bolts of benefit sharing. Afghanistan and Pakistan can't understand, calculate or execute the benefit-sharing model, unless there is an agreement on the data used for projections, predictions, calculations and monitoring. An elementary step in this regard is accepting each other's rights to information, and to agree not to guard hydro data as a state secret.

(5) Use key findings of joint research projects to sensitizestakeholders on both sides. The key strategic step would be to identify water diplomats on both sides that are well respected and acceptable to the wider stakeholders. If the


48

water champions/diplomats from both sides effectively manage to build support for water-sharing, using benefit sharing in respective constituencies, it is possible to create history by developing cordial relationship between the two nations for sharing water. Using findings from joint studies as the foundation, water diplomats from both sides would be able to build consensus on cross cutting issues that affect both sides, such as, climate change, pollution of rivers and water resources (Afghanistan and Pakistan share the unique position of being upper and lower riparians, respectively) etc.

(6) Institutions on both sides should understand and emphasize the importance of building in-house consensus over joint management of shared waters: Dedicated institutions in Afghanistan and Pakistan also need to strategize to build in-country consensus over shared waters, in order to achieve any plan between the two countries. This would require identifying internal stakeholders and engaging with them in time to build a common vision for shared waters. This would need engaging concerned government departments, political leaders, media, civil society, academia and research think tanks, at the earliest. In case of Pakistan, consultations need to be done with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) and Balochistan provinces that are the direct recipients of water flowing from Afghanistan. Simultaneously, consultations and consensus building should be initiated between key concerned government departments, including WAPDA, and Irrigation Department, National Engineering Services Pakistan (NESPAC), Planning and Development, IRSA, Pakistan Commission on Indus Treaty etc. On civil society front, a number of NGOs, like Oxfam, Indus Water Consortium, LEAD Pakistan etc., and think tanks like Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT), Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) etc. are already conducting research on this topic, and should be consulted. Last, but not the least, academia and research groups, such as agriculture universities, engineering schools and diplomacy departments of various universities should be engaged and consulted. On similar lines, Afghanistan should do the same to ensure there is sufficient in-house support for a proposed way forward, before the two countries engage.

Phase III: With success recorded in phase I and II, the end goal for the two countries should be to establish joint commission on Kabul River for management of shared waters. The authors propose a treaty, incumbent upon success in phase I and II. Mutual trust and cooperation can result in effective management of shared waters, through collective efforts. Both countries and their politicians should prioritise establishing joint commission for management of shared waters.

49


LEA

D P

akis

tan

Insp

irin

g lead

ers

hip

for

a s

ust

ain

ab

le w

orl

d

Contact usLEAD Pakistan, LEAD House, F-7 Markaz, Islamabad - PakistanT: +92 (051) 2651511F: +92 (051) 2651512E: [email protected]: www.lead.org.pk

LEAD Pakistan